# Chuck Westfall & the 5D Mark III



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 13, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/chuck-westfall-the-5d-mark-iii/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/chuck-westfall-the-5d-mark-iii/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/chuck-westfall-the-5d-mark-iii/"></a></div>
<strong>Chuck Westfall Interview

</strong>Canon’s Chuck Westfall interviewed with Arash Hazeghi about the 5D Mark III and what sets it apart from its predecessors. It’s an interesting read, and offers lots of insight into the improvements in sensor design as well as the all new autofocus system.</p>
<p><strong>Mr Westfall breaks down the AF system

</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>CW: The number and distribution of high-precision cross-type AF points has increased on the new 61-point AF system relative to the 45-point AF system used by the EOS-1D Mark IV. Moreover:</p>
<p>· The overall AF system speed of the EOS-1D X including lens drive is superior to that of the EOS-1D Mark IV on a lens for lens basis. The overall AF detection speed of the EOS 5D Mark III is superior to the AF detection speed of the EOS-1D Mark IV.</p>
<p>· The level of AF precision for 5 of the central area AF points on the 61-point sensor (i.e., the dual X-shaped cross-type points) is superior to the level of precision for any of the AF points on the 1D Mark IV.</p>
<p>· 21 cross-type AF points in the central area of the 61-point sensor are functional with maximum apertures as small as f/5.6; None (zero) of the cross-type points on the EOS-1D Mark IV are functional as cross-type sensors at maximum apertures smaller than f/4.</p>
<p>· The 61-point AF sensor has twice the low light sensitivity as the 1D Mark IV’s 45-point AF sensor (EV -2 vs. EV -1).</p>
<p>· The 61-point AF system supports AI Servo III, which is superior in subject tracking stability and consistency compared to AI Servo II found on the EOS-1D Mark IV.</p>
<p>· The 61-point AF system adds a greater degree of user control for subjects with various characteristics of acceleration and deceleration such as birds in flight.</p>
<p>· The 61-point AF system not only has 16 more AF points than any of the 45-point systems, it is also 20% wider in coverage (19mm vs. 15mm), making it easier for photographers to keep their subjects within the active AF area.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.arihazeghiphotography.com/AH_CW_interview/">Read the entire interview</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/847545-REG/Canon_5260B002_EOS_5D_Mark_III.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296">Preorder the 5D Mark III at B&H for $3499</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
```


----------



## t.linn (Mar 13, 2012)

If it is just a matter of doing the math, an increase of 4mm from 15 to 19 should yield a significant 26.7% increase in coverage.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 13, 2012)

I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview. 

I found his response to the question about high ISO performance with RAW files more than a bit unsatisfying: 
_"These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies."_

It sounds like the camera has a great autofocus system and I know that's what most 5D II people wanted, but as a 7D owner hoping for improvements in sensor technology, his comments aren't giving me a lot of confidence.


----------



## JonJT (Mar 13, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.
> 
> I found his response to the question about high ISO performance with RAW files more than a bit unsatisfying:
> _"These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies."_
> ...



Do you know what amount of noise reduction Canon has achieved in jpegs, in comparison to the mkii?

Edit: I'm wondering if I should just buy a 7D, once it drops under 1400 new or, hold out for the new body later this year/early next year. But, if the 5Dmkiii doesn't show a marked improvement in DR and ISO performance, I hold little confidence that Canon will see any significant improvements in performance of their APS-C sensors, as well.


----------



## DeepShadows (Mar 13, 2012)

My favorite quote by far was this:

"AH: Given the increased burst speed why doesn’t the 5D Mark III support class 10 SD-UHS cards?

CW: The EOS 5D Mark III supports Class 10 SDXC and SDHC memory cards, but not the UHS standard."

Gee thanks Chuck, we know it doesn't, he asked WHY does it not support them and you answered by saying it doesn't support it..... great, there goes the usefulness of the SD card slot for me


----------



## JonJT (Mar 13, 2012)

DeepShadows said:


> My favorite quote by far was this:
> 
> "AH: Given the increased burst speed why doesn’t the 5D Mark III support class 10 SD-UHS cards?
> 
> ...



Hmmm, RAW on both cards, I assume was your desired usage?


----------



## Seamus (Mar 13, 2012)

Thanks Chuck... way to not answer the questions. Disappointing interview, can't wait for some real world testing.


----------



## Terry Rogers (Mar 13, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.
> 
> I found his response to the question about high ISO performance with RAW files more than a bit unsatisfying:
> _"These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies."_
> ...



I literally laughed out loud when I read "These figures are not being disclosed". Really?!? REALY!!!???? He has got to be kidding us. For the life of me I cannot understand why canon would not want to disclose this. It's not like we're not going to find out in a few weeks anyways (I know, double negative). It just makes it seems like Canon his trying to hide something. If they are so proud of their improved jpeg performance, why not improved raw performance. It's the raw performance that the vast majority of 5d3 owners actually care about.

I'm a little baffled.


----------



## Drewskers (Mar 13, 2012)

There is an arrogance, if not actual contempt, shown for the customer in this interview. The answer about f/8 focusing borders on flippant.


----------



## D_Rochat (Mar 13, 2012)

Drewskers said:


> There is an arrogance, if not actual contempt, shown for the customer in this interview. The answer about f/8 focusing borders on flippant.



"CW: This request has been conveyed for consideration."

I must have read another article because I didn't detect any "arrogance". The fact that they are listening to their consumers and considering f/8 is far better than him flat out saying no. You have to keep in mind that he has to be careful with what he says and promises because Canon customers would want his head if he went back on something he said, no matter what the reasons were.


----------



## Drewskers (Mar 13, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Drewskers said:
> 
> 
> > There is an arrogance, if not actual contempt, shown for the customer in this interview. The answer about f/8 focusing borders on flippant.
> ...



I worked for a Big Corporation (about the size of Canon) for 30+ years, so allow me to translate for you what it means when a corporate mouthpiece says something like "This request has been conveyed for consideration":

"You're annoying the crap out of me, go away and die"


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 13, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.
> 
> I found his response to the question about high ISO performance with RAW files more than a bit unsatisfying:
> _"These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies."_
> ...


ditto there is always so much spin and or dodging the real questions people want answered whenever he says anything


----------



## Ricku (Mar 13, 2012)

So Canon likes to brag about improvements in jpeg noise, but are totally silent when asked about raw noise (the one thing that truly matters).

Gee, I wonder what this means..


----------



## pravkp (Mar 13, 2012)

At the very least a statement like "better than 5D2.." would have given us something to cheer.

May be we should stop worrying about whatever Canon has to say and simply wait for the camera to be tested in the wild.


----------



## DeepShadows (Mar 13, 2012)

JonJT said:


> DeepShadows said:
> 
> 
> > My favorite quote by far was this:
> ...



Yes sir! Now I can just imagine the buffer filling and taking forever to dump to that max 30MB/S SD card while my 90 MB/S CF cards sit in boredom and wait... I guess I might as well just shoot without the backup slow card if it's going to make me miss shots


----------



## erfon (Mar 13, 2012)

Terry Rogers said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.
> ...




My read when he made that comment: "I can't disclose it because we know it's not nearly as great as many are expecting and we don't want this issue to blow up and affect sales"


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 13, 2012)

Oh yeah the difference in speed between having it write raw to the CF and to the SD is massive (well this is based on the 1Dmk3 anyway) i only write raw to SD if its an emergency generally i have RAW to CF and jpg to SD to at least have the jpg backup if the CF card takes a dump


----------



## Sinsear (Mar 13, 2012)

DeepShadows said:


> JonJT said:
> 
> 
> > DeepShadows said:
> ...



Are there tests or a video out there that shows the difference between write times when doing a mirror on both SD+CF cards vs. CF card alone? I too am curious about this, and if the write times are significantly slower with CF+SD, I may not use the SD slot and just use the CF slot only.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 13, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> Oh yeah the difference in speed between having it write raw to the CF and to the SD is massive (well this is based on the 1Dmk3 anyway) i only write raw to SD if its an emergency generally i have RAW to CF and jpg to SD to at least have the jpg backup if the CF card takes a dump



I have an SD card slotted just in case the CF card fills without me noticing (which on the 1Ds3 hasn't happened yet)


----------



## yunusoglu (Mar 13, 2012)

unfocused said:


> _AH: Canon has indicated two stops improvement in high ISO performance relative to the 5D Mark II. We understand this figure refers to in-camera JPEG files with noise reduction. Approximately how much of an improvement in high ISO performance or low ISO dynamic range is expected in RAW (CR2) files when using the latest Canon DPP software?
> 
> CW: These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies._



I believe even 1 whole stop improvement is pretty good advertisement but since CW responds to the question very very politically, I believe DR of 5D3 is probably on par with 5D2. It's so obvious that I'm not even looking forward for any tests or in-depth reviews...

Such a shame...


----------



## Viggo (Mar 13, 2012)

I'm thinking the same thing.

At 100 iso, what will be better with 18mp of the 1d x compared to the 21 mp 5d2 at 100 iso? Will I actually see better DR, and they claim better detail, how?

And also, after color-calibrating my shots lately, I see NO difference in color between any camera and lens combo. So what's left?

I know about all the other differences, but for pure iso IQ, will the 1dx and 5d 3 offer anything better than the 5d2?


----------



## WarStreet (Mar 13, 2012)

I liked the detailed information about the AF and metering. This is really a great AF system if what we are reading proves to be true. The only missing feature is the f8 focusing, but it is good to know that they are considering this request.


----------



## josupi (Mar 13, 2012)

to quote Mr. Westfall:

"A new feature called Digital Lens Optimizer processes RAW images to achieve ideal optical characteristics for all types of optical aberration or diffraction, effects of a low-pass filter in front of a CMOS sensor, etc. This function improves image quality particularly in the image periphery in addition to the image center. This function is made possible because the entire design-through-manufacture process, for camera, CMOS sensor, EF lens, and DPP, is carried out entirely at Canon. Images are processed optimally using lens information in the image files (focal length, subject distance, and aperture) and lens data specially for the Digital Lens Optimizer. (However, the size of a .CR2 file will be two to three times larger after applying the Digital Lens Optimizer.) "

Would that mean, that a third party software like Lightroom will be able to see and process a raw-file with the "Digital Lens Optimization" of DPP? A really cool feature if true. 
And if it was possible to convert the "corrected" raw-file to the dng-format one would be more independant of the update-policy of adobe.


----------



## Yasmin (Mar 13, 2012)

So what Chucky is saying here, how much is the Raw improvement over 5D-II?

One stop? half stop?! Or even less than half stop?


----------



## AprilForever (Mar 13, 2012)

Chuck, bro, all this talk does not convince me. Give me a 7D mk II! I will gladly pony over the dough. Just make it APS-C.


----------



## JonJT (Mar 13, 2012)

DeepShadows said:


> JonJT said:
> 
> 
> > DeepShadows said:
> ...



Maybe the camera will allow you to write to the CF first and mirror it later? It seems rather silly on Canon's part to not allow you to make two copies of each RAW file, one onto each card.


----------



## Old Shooter (Mar 13, 2012)

DeepShadows said:


> JonJT said:
> 
> 
> > DeepShadows said:
> ...



This amazes me! The T3i supports UHS-1 cards; why not the $3500 Mark III?

It seems more and more to me that the CF card slot is the primary... All the burst speed numbers in the specs quote an 8GB UDMA card and a 128GB UDMA 7 card... No mention of what the SD card alone can support...

You would think, particularly if you were writing RAW+JPEG to both cards in a primary/backup scenario, that Canon would want both card slots capable of maximum performance? What good will it do if your blazing fast CF card has already written the images and your backup SD card is still playing catch up?


----------



## V8Beast (Mar 13, 2012)

josupi said:


> to quote Mr. Westfall:
> 
> "A new feature called Digital Lens Optimizer processes RAW images to achieve ideal optical characteristics for all types of optical aberration or diffraction, effects of a low-pass filter in front of a CMOS sensor, etc. This function improves image quality particularly in the image periphery in addition to the image center. This function is made possible because the entire design-through-manufacture process, for camera, CMOS sensor, EF lens, and DPP, is carried out entirely at Canon. Images are processed optimally using lens information in the image files (focal length, subject distance, and aperture) and lens data specially for the Digital Lens Optimizer. (However, the size of a .CR2 file will be two to three times larger after applying the Digital Lens Optimizer.) "



This feature has received very little buzz, but I find it quite fascinating. I'm very curious how effective it will be. Maybe it's a gimmick, maybe it's a legitimately useful feature. With the shipment date of 5DIIIs imminent, we shall see very soon


----------



## Cali_PH (Mar 13, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> josupi said:
> 
> 
> > to quote Mr. Westfall:
> ...



It caught my attention too. Is he saying that it could, for example, correct for some of the edge of image deficiencies of UWA lenses like the 17-40L? It can't magically make images sharp edge-to-edge of course, but possibly reduce CA and other issues?


----------



## V8Beast (Mar 13, 2012)

Cali_PH said:


> It caught my attention too. Is he saying that it could, for example, correct for some of the edge of image deficiencies of UWA lenses like the 17-40L? It can't magically make images sharp edge-to-edge of course, but possibly reduce CA and other issues?



That's how I interpret it. In light of all the stink that's been made over the 5DIII's noise and DR, if this feature actually works, this is the kind of innovation people are accustomed to seeing from Canon. 

Optically, my L lenses are damn near perfect, but I wouldn't mind less vignetting from my 24-105.


----------



## jrista (Mar 13, 2012)

Terry Rogers said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.
> ...



They are not trying to hide something. Results with RAW are entirely subjective and depend on the kind of post-processing applied, and how much effort you put into post processing. Given that the same RAW data was used to produce the JPEG's in the first place, there is really nothing to prevent a clever and hard working photographer from creating final output that is just as good as the in-camera JPEG. Its just that it could take a LOT of effort, and many photographers will be unwilling to expend the amount of energy necessary. As such, they can't publish any specific numbers, as results will vary from photographer to photographer.

Thats in contrast to the JPEGS. They know exactly what kind of processing they have put into them, and exactly what that processing can achieve. They also know that the results oscillate within a fairly narrow range. Only then can a company like Canon legitimately and safely (for their own sakes, to keep themselves from getting sued) claim any particular improvements.

We'll know soon enough what the low-level hardware is capable of from DXO. Around the same time we'll also know what we can expect in a more real-world context from DPR (i.e. without pushing the hardware to its absolute limits and expending a tremendous amount of time and energy in post to extract every last ounce from every last pixel). It may not improve by the full 2.5 stops we all want it to, but I believe it will improve adequately one way or another.


----------



## Matthew Saville (Mar 13, 2012)

How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.

Just about all I could gain from this is, I noticed he used different words when comparing the 1DX and the 5D mk3 to the 1D mkIV. From what it SOUNDS like, I'd say that both the 1DX AND the 5D mk3 are going to be better focusing than the 1D mkIV, but in some subtle, tech-jargon-obscured way, the 1D mkIV will retain an advantage over the 5D mk3?

Anybody care to venture additional guesses at how the 5D mk3 will AF compared to other flagship cameras? I know there was a similarly subtle and almost-impossible-to-detect difference between the D700 and the D3's AF, and then the D3s etc. But I also know that the D700 (and now the D800 it seems) have ALMOST EVERY BIT of both accuracy AND speed when it comes to AF.

If Canon has found some subtle way to "cripple" the flagship AF in the 5D mk3 so that it looks awesome and flagship-y on paper but actually starts to drop the ball in low light enough to make people want for the 1DX, well, I think that is an epic fail on Canon's part. Although it would be in keeping with their long tradition of tactful product placement.

However personally I'm assuming the best; I bet the 5D mk3's AF will be 99.9% of the 1DX, and it will be the perfect camera for MANY types of photographers...

=Matt=

BTW, the whole thing regarding RAW noise is kinda silly. In my opinion, Chuck is just embarrassed to state that Canon's own RAW processing options play second-fiddle (or third, or fourth?) to Adobe's powerful ACR, and other RAW converters that do a WAY better job at maintaining low light high ISO image detail while eliminating noise.


----------



## awinphoto (Mar 13, 2012)

Matthew Saville said:


> How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.
> 
> Just about all I could gain from this is, I noticed he used different words when comparing the 1DX and the 5D mk3 to the 1D mkIV. From what it SOUNDS like, I'd say that both the 1DX AND the 5D mk3 are going to be better focusing than the 1D mkIV, but in some subtle, tech-jargon-obscured way, the 1D mkIV will retain an advantage over the 5D mk3?
> 
> ...



From what I gathered, he's saying the 5d3 and the 1dx uses better tracking mechanisms and al servo will have a newer generation II vs III, so both should be "better" than the 1d4, but the 1dx will be even better because it has the IFCL sensor, but the 5d3 should be better than the 1d4, although in the end the proof will be in the pudding in a few days/weeks. 

I personally was rubbed the wrong way with all his vague answers, but then again, he probably was given explicit instructions what to answer, what not to answer, and if he wants to keep his nice fat paycheck, he better abide by that, so i think it's more his handlers telling him "no comment" rather than him avoiding questions for the heck of it.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 13, 2012)

If the AF is as good or better than the 1D4 then there wont be many upset people


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2012)

Drewskers said:


> D_Rochat said:
> 
> 
> > Drewskers said:
> ...



That's a little harsh, don't you think? Big corporations have to listen to their customers, because the customer always comes first.

Oh, wait, my mistake. The _shareholder_ comes first. As for customer suggestions, those are always handled appropriately:


----------



## Seamus (Mar 13, 2012)

The digital lens optimizer does sound great, the AF sounds great... Hopefully in less than two weeks I'll know for sure.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 13, 2012)

Seriously, I don't know if Westfall just isn't very good at corporate PR or if Canon isn't very good at it, but in either case, the approach seems to be quite behind the times in comparison to how smart companies handle their public relations.

People get jaded about corporate relations, but there are quite a few very smart and good examples out there of companies who understand the importance of candor and keeping their customer base informed with intelligent, reasonable explanations. 

Reading this interview made me think that Westfall went into it unprepared and expecting to just coast with a few talking points about what he wanted to emphasize. Of course, you always want to get your points across, but being unable to answer some pretty softball questions is amateurish. He didn't do himself or his employer any favors in this interview.


----------



## t.linn (Mar 13, 2012)

Matthew Saville said:


> How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.



I realize I'm pi$$ing into the wind on this issue but I am amazed, not just at this particular comment, but at all the negativity directed at Chuck Westfall. Is no one able to see beyond their own perspective to understand his? Chuck works for Canon. It is not his job to be a critic or to disclose proprietary plans or to answer every question that is asked. He is not supposed to be an objective observer who sees all sides. People may be frustrated with his lack of candor on certain performance parameters or Canon's future plans but he is always truthful—and you'll notice that he doesn't deny that issues exist.

To my knowledge, there is not another Chuck Westfall in this industry and we should be thankful that he works for Canon. He is genuinely knowledgeable about the products, how they work, and issues that users have with them. When he says Canon is aware of a situation and is looking into it, you know he is speaking from a position of knowledge. He's accessible to darn near everyone who has a question and if he personally doesn't know the answer he will find someone who does. He is an advocate for us within Canon and that's a very good thing when you're dealing with a company that doesn't always seem to be completely in touch with its customers.


----------



## awinphoto (Mar 13, 2012)

unfocused said:


> Seriously, I don't know if Westfall just isn't very good at corporate PR or if Canon isn't very good at it, but in either case, the approach seems to be quite behind the times in comparison to how smart companies handle their public relations.
> 
> People get jaded about corporate relations, but there are quite a few very smart and good examples out there of companies who understand the importance of candor and keeping their customer base informed with intelligent, reasonable explanations.
> 
> Reading this interview made me think that Westfall went into it unprepared and expecting to just coast with a few talking points about what he wanted to emphasize. Of course, you always want to get your points across, but being unable to answer some pretty softball questions is amateurish. He didn't do himself or his employer any favors in this interview.



I personally dont know if i'd perfer canon's PR approach or Apples... Apple released an iphone for instance, big press conference, big announcement, big presentation, lots of buzz... and then after the announcement, the dark curtain gets drawn again until the release, albeit, to apples credit, their release is usually 1 week or less from the announcement date, and they do let developers in early to play, experiment, and build apps for the new product. But to the layman, there's no trade shows (focus), no outside interviews (chuck westfall)... I think part of his vagueness about future products and F8 is somewhat justifiable as I dont think he would really be privy to that info, probably very few are... The RAW info he probably knows but much like apple, mum's the word until it is released.


----------



## t.linn (Mar 13, 2012)

Seamus said:


> The digital lens optimizer does sound great



I have to admit that I didn't even read Chuck's comments about this feature because I do not, nor will I ever, use DPP. Building proprietary features into your own proprietary RAW converter software seems like a waste of resources. Why not work with Adobe to make those features available in ACR and LR? Or release the specs so that Adobe can do it themselves? This seems like it would be a much greater service to Canon's customers.

Having said that, I'm completely ignorant on software development so maybe this isn't even feasible. But regardless, features like this that aren't available to ACR and LR users don't do most people any good.


----------



## jrista (Mar 13, 2012)

t.linn said:


> Seamus said:
> 
> 
> > The digital lens optimizer does sound great
> ...



As far as I understand, Canon *does* provide their specifications and even source code to the likes of Adobe, and even the community at large. Not long ago people were discussing DPP noise reduction and how it seemed better than Lightrooms. A Canon rep stated that they make their noise reduction algorithms public, and they were unaware of why Lightroom did not make use of them. 

I don't think the problem is a lack of openness on Canon's part. It seems more to be a lack of interest on the part of parties like Adobe.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 13, 2012)

t.linn said:


> If it is just a matter of doing the math, an increase of 4mm from 15 to 19 should yield a significant 26.7% increase in coverage.



The coverage is a big step up from the 5D2 coverage, pretty impressive (if they were to ever put it into a 7D2 then holy smokes would it have amazing AF coverage of the frame).


----------



## awinphoto (Mar 13, 2012)

jrista said:


> t.linn said:
> 
> 
> > Seamus said:
> ...



I will admit i haven't done any recent tests, but my last tests I did in raw NR and overall IQ I did almost 3 years ago vs Adobe Camera Raw vs DPP, DPP was more cumbersome, it wasn't pretty, but in the end, it was a cleaner file (3 years ago) than ACR. I do use ACR because of convenience and and seamless integration with photoshop, but maybe if Canon could develop a 3rd party plug-in for lightroom or photoshop for DPP, then maybe I would be more inclined to use that even more.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 13, 2012)

t.linn said:


> Seamus said:
> 
> 
> > The digital lens optimizer does sound great
> ...



I don't like using multiple software packages either, but I could see myself running images through DPP on a case-by-case basis, doing nothing other than DLO, and then pushing into LR. It's a bit off putting that doing so will double file size. Seems... odd.

That said, IIRC, this isn't a 5D3/1Dx feature, but that all cameras through the 30D are supported. Pretty cool if I want to reach back and fix some old frames.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 13, 2012)

jrista said:


> Terry Rogers said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



But the results IN the RAW files themselves are the least subjective of all....

Granted I'm not sure Nikon has become any better at all of so and so many stops better due to jpg NR stuff recently either.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 13, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> If the AF is as good or better than the 1D4 then there wont be many upset people



+1

My reading is that Canon thinks it has better algorithms than the 1D4 had and that the 5D3 can run through it's code faster and more often than the 1D4 can run through it's code and that they think the AF detector in the 5D3 is more precise and sensitive (in the past some of the sensitive ones have actually had more trouble under bright sun though, under glaring sun and white uniforms the old 20D tracked better than the 50D at times IMO, but that was xxD level stuff and hopefully only applies there) and it has better point spread and x-type above f/4, etc. So the only thing lacking is f/8 at first glance. The one place where the 1D4 is better is that the juice it has from it's battery means it gives full current to the super-tele (and perhaps a few other lenses?) AF systems so the lens themselves will be able to spin their AF faster when using the 1D4 compared to when using the 5D3, but the body's tracking algos with be more advanced and running and sampling more often. How that works out in the end, who knows.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 13, 2012)

t.linn said:


> Matthew Saville said:
> 
> 
> > How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.
> ...



Yeah, to be fair, what else did you expect him to say given his position?


----------



## Terry Rogers (Mar 13, 2012)

Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?


----------



## jrista (Mar 13, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Terry Rogers said:
> ...



If you mean strait out of the camera, no modifications at all...yes, totally agree.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 13, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, I don't know if Westfall just isn't very good at corporate PR or if Canon isn't very good at it, but in either case, the approach seems to be quite behind the times in comparison to how smart companies handle their public relations...
> ...



Not trying to turn this into some anti-Chuck Westfall thread. I just felt that in this interview, at least, he seemed a bit unprepared for questions that he should have expected and been prepared for. I would not expect any corporate spokesperson to divulge proprietary information, but I think he came across as either dismissive or poorly informed on issues that he should have known he would be asked about. 

As an example, look at jrista's comments (shortened here): 


> Results with RAW are entirely subjective and depend on the kind of post-processing applied...As such, they can't publish any specific numbers, as results will vary from photographer to photographer.



A similar answer from Westfall would have been much more useful and candid and would have served Canon better.

As far as Apple goes, I would say they are not exactly a great example of good corporate communications either. Apple relies on a loyal fan base and a carefully cultivated mystique. It's been successful for them, but I don't think it's a good example of the way corporate communications should be handled.


----------



## awinphoto (Mar 13, 2012)

unfocused said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Fair enough... I agree it could have been more carefully orchestrated and or answered, just about everything is better than no comment. While I never been a fan of chucky, I feel he did as well as anyone really in their heart of hearts felt he would, even though we deep down wished for more down and dirty info.


----------



## mccrum (Mar 13, 2012)

Matthew Saville said:


> How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.


See, I always figured this is exactly why people like Westfall are employed by places like Canon. Do you think it's easy to actually sound like you've answered the question but haven't when you actually know the real answer which would just be easier to just say?


----------



## zhap03 (Mar 13, 2012)

In the mean time... people are unwrapping their D4's while we wait for our 1Dx to arrive. Canon must be putting the finishing touches on the instruction manual. *sigh*


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 13, 2012)

Terry Rogers said:


> Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?



It is too early to compare a 5D3 and 1D4.


----------



## akiskev (Mar 13, 2012)

My favorite part:

*AH*: Given the increased burst speed *why* doesn’t the 5D Mark III support class 10 SD-UHS cards?

*CW*: The EOS 5D Mark III supports Class 10 SDXC and SDHC memory cards, but not the UHS standard. 

;D


----------



## tt (Mar 13, 2012)

Chuck also had an interview at http://blog.planet5d.com/2012/03/questions-answered-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-hdmi-video/ with a bit more Q&A
1st question about the focusing screen also. 

Shame that they couldn't create a custom. 5DMkIII which just has an EgS like screen even if it wouldn't be replaceable!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 14, 2012)

Terry Rogers said:


> Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?



It's also a lot slower fps, no f/8 AF, drives super-tele more slowly, probably not a lot. The 1Ds3 may plummet though.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 14, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Terry Rogers said:
> 
> 
> > Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?
> ...



I hope the 1Ds3 price plummets. I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. Max on the 5D3 is 840mm :-[


----------



## rlarsen (Mar 14, 2012)

I enjoyed reading Chuck's interview and I was very pleased to learn about significant improvements to 5D auto focus. It's important to me to be able to use the new camera to shoot action. Six frames a second with high-end auto focus sounds really good to me. I had planned to buy one DX, but damn, it's nearly $7000, and it's pretty darn heavy.
Instead I'm getting 2 5D MK lll's in a few days and I really look forward to many of it's features.
Chuck Westfall is a great guy and he supports photographers. For years, nearly every time I called him, he picked up the phone and helped answer my technical questions and offered advice. He was always friendly, and patient.

Chuck will never discuss future Canon technology or products, but he and fellow tech expert, Rudy Winston, always pass on photographer's suggestions, wishes (and complaints) to Canon Japan. 

Chuck, Rudy, and other Canon USA techs don't always agree with decisions made in Japan but from what I can tell they are loyal to their company while always supporting and speaking up for photographers.

During my 36 years as a pro using Canon there have always been a few things with their products that drive me crazy and I question, but I use Canon for their innovation, leadership, and all the things they do well.

For some reason, if you go to the Super Bowl, World Series, NBA Finals, the White House, Iraq, Fashion Week in New York or Milan, the Olympics, you will see a lot of white lenses.

Use the gear that works best for your needs and budget, but don't knock Chuck Westfall, he supports photographers.

Rex
Michigan


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 14, 2012)

rlarsen said:


> I enjoyed reading Chuck's interview and I was very pleased to learn about significant improvements to 5D auto focus. It's important to me to be able to use the new camera to shoot action. Six frames a second with high-end auto focus sounds really good to me. I had planned to buy one DX, but damn, it's nearly $7000, and it's pretty darn heavy.
> Instead I'm getting 2 5D MK lll's in a few days and I really look forward to many of it's features.
> Chuck Westfall is a great guy and he supports photographers. For years, nearly every time I called him, he picked up the phone and helped answer my technical questions and offered advice. He was always friendly, and patient.
> 
> ...



+1 - Chuck is the conduit between Canon and photographers


----------



## GL (Mar 14, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I hope the 1Ds3 price plummets. I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. Max on the 5D3 is 840mm :-[



I believe it will. I wouldn't pay more than $3,000 for a used 1DsIII. I would struggle paying that much for a new one now that the 5D3 is out and proud.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 14, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. *Max on the 5D3 is 840mm* :-[



Not sure why you think that. 1200mm on the 5DIII is quite possible.





Who needs a house?  

(But then I suppose you'd be on about nothing being better than 1680mm... : )


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 14, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. *Max on the 5D3 is 840mm* :-[
> ...



Indeed ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

If I had the money I could be tempted - although probably I would be after a 80mps MF first


----------



## t.linn (Mar 16, 2012)

rlarsen said:


> Chuck Westfall is a great guy and he supports photographers. For years, nearly every time I called him, he picked up the phone and helped answer my technical questions and offered advice. He was always friendly, and patient.



Exactly.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Mar 17, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I hope the 1Ds3 price plummets. I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. Max on the 5D3 is 840mm :-[



No, the 5D3 will AF just fine with the 1200mm f/5.6L.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 17, 2012)

Stephen Melvin said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I hope the 1Ds3 price plummets. I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. Max on the 5D3 is 840mm :-[
> ...



I had discounted 1200 due to diffculty in getting one - however that would be 1680 on the 1Ds3 then .....


----------



## almograve (Mar 22, 2012)

Sorry Guys but I'm getting lost on this SD card battle...

You say that UHS is not support on the 5DMKIII. Very well, nothing we can do about it.

What do you mean by not supported? A UHS card would not work or it woudn't benefit from the full speed?

I'm planning on getting this on the primary CF port:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/646876-REG/SanDisk_SDCFXP_032G_A91_32GB_Extreme_Pro_CompactFlash.html

But I need to choose the SD card that goes along. My main purpose is Backup, ideally in RAW format. Woud this work???
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/824140-REG/SanDisk_SDSDXPA_032G_A75_32_GB_SDHC_Memory.html

if it does work, it is over speedy for what the 5DMKIII can do and I should just get something slower and save the money? like:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/828326-REG/SanDisk_SDSDRX3_032G_A21_32GB_SDHC_Memory_Card.html

I have an Apple Macbook Pro early 2011, maybe there is an impact on the support SD cards as well...

Thank you,
almograve


----------



## ereka (Mar 22, 2012)

Page 32 of the 5DMkIII manual (small print at the bottom of the page):

"Although the camera does not comply with the UHS speed class standard, UHS SDHC/SDXC cards can be used"


----------

