# 5D Mark II Replacement



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 15, 2010)

```
<p><strong>Time to address the questions

<span style="font-weight: normal;">I am getting a ton of questions regarding the 5D Mark II and how much longer it’s going to be a current camera. While I obviously have nothing definitive, there are been a few pieces of information come my way in regards to a Canon roadmap.</span> </strong></p>
<p><strong>5D Mark III

</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;"> A Q2/Q3 announcement in 2011, this is not yet decided within Canon.</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Big megapixel boost, 28mp +</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Continue to build on EOSHD and supreme image quality.</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;">A variant of the 7D AF system.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;">I can’t see them not calling it 5D Mark III, the 5D name carries a lot of weight.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;">Expect it to be in the same $2699 range the 5D Mark II was at launch.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-weight: normal;">Obvious ergonomic upgrades.</span></li>
</ul>
<p>I get asked a lot if people are safe to buy a 5D Mark II now. The answer is “yes”, it’s a great camera today and it’ll still be a great camera in a year.</p>
<p>There is not a lot of urgency for Canon & Nikon to launch new higher end cameras in the current economic climate. Things look to improve in 2011. The 5D Mark II also still sells extremely well.</p>
<p><strong>Forum Moderator

</strong><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">I need a couple of forum moderators, just send “Canon Rumors Guy” a message from </span><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/forum"><span style="font-weight: normal;">within the forum</span></a><span style="font-weight: normal;">.</span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span></strong><strong>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## MadButcher (Oct 15, 2010)

Can the centre-point AF of a 5D2 keep up with the AF in a 70-200 f/2.8 IS?

I wish such a 5D3 would been introduced last Photokina.
Especially now my 40D has gone.

I do sometimes action-photography in low-light.
Is it better to switch to a D700 in that case?
On the other hand I would like filming.

I have been thinking of a 7D/ 5D2 or a 1D4.
The last one is expensive and only APS-H.
Better to buy glass for it.

So I'm also thinking of a D700.

b.t.w.
When will there be pixel-binning for video (anti-aliasing).

about anti-aliasing.
I hope that the anti-aliasing filter on the 5D3 won't be to strong.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 15, 2010)

My guess on the 5D III. Upgrade to 40D focusing, downgrade to 60D body, video stays about the same, upgraded sound.

The big sales points will be the excess megapixels and the tilting screen from the 60D.


----------



## Cornell (Oct 15, 2010)

RE: "I canâ€™t see them not calling it 5D Mark III, the 5D name carries a lot of weight."

Giving the name 4D to the successor would imply a more significantly sophisticated, that is more professional, camera line. With Canon, the lower the number, the more sophisticated the camera is. 

Canon is boxed in the other way by the 7D. After, 6D, there's no farther to go.


----------



## Flake (Oct 15, 2010)

Upgrade to 40D focussing? I think that's a downgrade! hopefully it'll be an upgrade to 7D focussing. As for the body the shutter assembly will not fit in a smaller body, so it's about as small as it's going to get. This is a pro grade body so I don't foresee a move away from the current alloy shell type.

Can the centre spot keep up with the 70 - 200mm f/2.8? I'm not sure I understand this, I think it's putting the cart before the horse, the camera drives the lens at the speed it can (the 1D series drive them faster) but there autofocus components in the lens as well as the camera body.

One night a friend with a D700 and I with a 5D MkII both with 70 -200mm f/2.8 lenses on tried out the autofocus, the D700 stopped quite a way before the 5D MkII did. Although this is only a test of the light sensitivity of the autofocus it does show that the Nikon is not all that it's cracked up to be.

There's about one stop of usable sensitivity between the 5D MkII and the D700, I wouldn't expect that to be enough to justify a change.


The 5D MkII is not a sports / action camera, the 1D MkIV would be a fantastic choice and with its 16MP will give a decent resolution.

I think Nikon dropped the ball with the D3 & the D700, it's 12MP sensor is not really comparable with Canons, and the Expeed image processor is not in the same ball park, the only reason they have remained a viable player in the market has been the support of older reviewers who have been Nikon fans since they were top of the roost in the days of film, and have a soft spot for them.

Friend wants to sell the D700 and move to Canon so if you're interested ...................


----------



## tzalmagor (Oct 15, 2010)

I find the extra MPs abhorrent, nothing but a resource hog from the point of pushing the bits to the memory card to image processing on the computer. Between two identical (in price & features) 5DmkIII bodies, I'd rather have one with 21MP (and even 18MP) sensor than 28MP sensor.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 15, 2010)

Flake said:


> Upgrade to 40D focussing? I think that's a downgrade! hopefully it'll be an upgrade to 7D focussing.



In some ways, the 40D is an upgrade to the 5D's AF system (and I say 5D, not 5DII, since Canon did not update the 5D's AF system when they put it in the 5DII). The 5DII has 9 selectable AF points, but only one of them is a cross-type sensor. With the 40D, all 9 points are cross-type. The 5DII has AFMA, which the 40D lacks - Canon gave to the 50D, and then foolishly (IMO) took it away from the 60D. True, the 5DII has 6 more 'invisible' AF points and that can help with AI Servo AF, but the 5DII isn't really intended to shoot things that require AI Servo. So, on the whole I agree with the statement that the 40D AF is better than the 5DII's AF. 

I hope they make it 7d-like, too! That's what CRguy suggests as any rate, although what the 'variant' is remains to be seem. I'd guess it will have a smaller number of selectable points, but 15 cross-type points (even if 6 are not selectable), along with faster AF, would be fine. While it would be nice to have an f/8-sensitive center point, it's not going to happen - the ability to AF with f/8 for TC use is something they'll keep as a differentiator from the 1-series bodies.



Canon Rumors said:


> I get asked a lot if people are safe to buy a 5D Mark II now. The answer is â€œyesâ€, itâ€™s a great camera today and itâ€™ll still be a great camera in a year.



Bingo. If you need it now, buy it now. That's why one is currently on it's way to my door! ;D


----------



## Macadameane (Oct 15, 2010)

I know its going to happen anyway, but I would also rather have the MP in the 18-21 range. I don't need my files to be that large. Also would like the better light sensitivity, unless there has been some leaps and bounds in CMOS technology.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 15, 2010)

Flake said:


> Upgrade to 40D focussing? I think that's a downgrade!



*5D II*: 
9 AF Points (1 Cross Type) + 6 AF Assist Points

*40D*:
9 (Cross-type)

9 cross type vs 1 cross type. Going to 9 from 1 sounds like an upgrade to me.



> This is a pro grade body so I don't foresee a move away from the current alloy shell type.



Everybody thought that the 60D body would have stayed magnesium, but it didn't! I think that Canon will turn the 5D III into a *full frame Rebel* to increase 1Ds sales.



> I think Nikon dropped the ball with the D3 & the D700, it's 12MP sensor is not really comparable with Canons, ...



Lots of magazine covers being shot with the D300/D300s/D3/D3s, advertising too. Lots of black lenses at the Olympics, World Cup, etc. Many pros don't agree with you.



> ...the only reason they have remained a viable player in the market has been the support of older reviewers who have been Nikon fans since they were top of the roost in the days of film, and have a soft spot for them.



Pros don't make equipment choices based on reviews in consumers magazines or web site reviews.


----------



## traveller (Oct 15, 2010)

Sorry, but I think you're all being way too conservative... 

The specifications that people are suggesting for the 5D Mk3 are typically Canon, so I can see your points... But, Canon have allowed themselves to get into a position where Nikon have regained large amounts of market share by being far too tight with their feature set. 

9 AF points? A plastic body? Come on, what price point could this possibly sell at and not look pathetic compared to a furture D800? Canon have already made a massive error with the 60D and when the D7000 hits the stores, only Canon converts will buy it at anything like its current price. 

Do you think that the D800 will come with Nikon's old 11pt multi-CAM 1000 focusing system and a plastic body? Canon seriously needs to up-spec their cameras or risk losing the mid end of the market, so how about these specifications: 

45 AF points: 19 cross type 
5 fps
100% viewfinder
dual memory card slots
improved weather sealing
HD video - I'm sure some care about the details, most don't or won't as soon as proper full-frame video cameras appear.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 15, 2010)

traveller said:


> so how about these specifications:
> 
> 45 AF points: 19 cross type
> 5 fps
> ...



Seriously? If you add in a battery grip, you've pretty much just described the 1DsIII. The 5DIII will not equal the previous 1Ds model, any more than the 5DII was equal to the old 1DsII.


----------



## richy (Oct 15, 2010)

Interesting points, but what would they put in the 1ds4 to make it worth 3-4x the price? It would need to come with e a wine cellar and an Aston Martin Vanquish. 
If they go 28mp for the 5d3 (which sounds plausible) and upgrade the AF, weather sealing and add dual card slots, about all thats left to do is put in a higher res sensor which brings up potential quality issues and heading off towards 7d pixel size. Not saying you are wrong, but if they do that to a 5d3 I cannot wait to see the 1ds4! The d800 vs d3s is more analogous to the 5d3 and the 1d4 based on price positioning, the d700 doesn't look so great next to the d3x (apart from high iso). Its just how they chose to position their products relative to each other.


----------



## traveller (Oct 15, 2010)

O.K. I am trying to be controversial here! 

But Canon does need to stop thinking solely in terms of protecting the 1D/1Ds line. Keep the 21MP sensor if you want product differentiation, most people won't notice the difference between 21Mp and 30MP anyway. 

Ask yourselves what you would prefer, a 20MP class camera with the specifications that I gave, or a 30MP sensor in a 5D body? If it is the former (which I suspect would be preferred by the majority), then bear in mind that this is most likely what the D800 will be. 

Nobody thought that Nikon would produce a D700, because that would have killed D3 sales. This year, I was doubtful of the rumoured D7000 specifications, because they would be too close to the D300s. Nikon have shown that they don't quite work like this (perhaps D700x excepted). 

Canon need a great 'all-rounder' camera in a small body package, or Nikon will attract ever more followers. They haven't had the full-frame market to themselve for a camera-generation. Nikon entered this market with a strong hand and I don't see them letting up any time soon. Canon need to respond to the criticism levelled against the weak points of their current range, not myopically keep churning out the same old package with a new sensor.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 15, 2010)

traveller said:


> Canon need to respond to the criticism levelled against the weak points of their current range, not myopically keep churning out the same old package with a new sensor.



Well, Canon sure didn't heed that advice with the 60D...they churned out a package worse than the old one (but with 3 more megapixels - woot!). 

I really hope they don't apply the same logic (or lack thereof) to the 5DIII!!!


----------



## traveller (Oct 15, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> traveller said:
> 
> 
> > Canon need to respond to the criticism levelled against the weak points of their current range, not myopically keep churning out the same old package with a new sensor.
> ...



I agree with you there. I was trying to suggest what Canon should do, not what they will!  

I think we all know Canon too well for that. The predictions that Canon Rumors has made are probably pretty close to what we'll eventually see.


----------



## Macadameane (Oct 15, 2010)

I seriously doubt the 5D III's body will be reduced in terms of build quality. It's just below the top tier 1D (still an xD). I don't think it would make sense for them to only have 1 2 professional cameras that had a tough build (1D, 1Ds). Especially when they decided not too long ago to make the 7D tough.

Perhaps they are pushing the xxD cameras' standard down a notch to make room for xD cameras. The 7D is a great value, especially when compared to the 1D iv and company.


----------



## bvukich (Oct 15, 2010)

If they really wanted to shake things up, split the xxD series into x0D and x5D (e.g., 70D & 75D) variants. x0D will be the mid range crop sensor cameras we all know and love. The x5D would be nearly identical, but with a sensor equivalent to a 5D from two generations back. So let's say this was in the era of the 5DMkIII, we'd be looking at a 12.8MP sensor, about comparable to the 5Dc. Add $500 to the x0D price and call it a win.


----------



## Atlasman (Oct 15, 2010)

MadButcher said:


> Can the centre-point AF of a 5D2 keep up with the AF in a 70-200 f/2.8 IS?
> 
> I wish such a 5D3 would been introduced last Photokina.
> Especially now my 40D has gone.
> ...



Early this year I shot an entire hockey tournament using the 5DMKII and got better results than with my 7D. I've found nothing wrong with its ability to capture action.

Have a look here: www.sportsmoments.ca enter the following access code: SCFC2010 (all upper case).

The big advantage is the cropping powerâ€”you can go deep and still have sharpness and detail. Of course it depends on the glass that you use.

Here's another access code for an ice-hockey tournament: SSGHMA2010 (again all upper case).

Joseph.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 15, 2010)

Macadameane said:


> I seriously doubt the 5D III's body will be reduced in terms of build quality. It's just below the top tier 1D (still an xD). I don't think it would make sense for them to only have 1 2 professional cameras that had a tough build (1D, 1Ds). Especially when they decided not too long ago to make the 7D tough.
> 
> Perhaps they are pushing the xxD cameras' standard down a notch to make room for xD cameras. The 7D is a great value, especially when compared to the 1D iv and company.



Canon and Nikon have two different philosophies on camera models/lines. 

Canon builds *consumer* cameras, *pro-sume*r (WTF does that mean) cameras and *professional* cameras. The Rebel line and the xxD line were differentiated by build quality and a few extra features. The 5D line was a full frame xxD (no pro features). The 7D is a half step toward being a pro line except they have limited auto focus, etc, because Canon didn't want the 7D eating into 1D IV sales. Then we have the 1D and 1Ds lines with all the pro bells and whistles. 

From Canon's recent actions I think the 5D III will be down graded, just like the 60D. This leaves room for a 7D like full frame (lets call it a 3D ;D) that will sell for more than the 5D II.

Nikon only builds *consumer* cameras and *pro* cameras. There isn't much difference between their pro models for things like weather sealing, metering and auto focus. The top of line D3x - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible and the bottom of the pro line D300s - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible. Canon would never do this, they worry about cannibalizing sales. And this is why a 7D will never be as good as a D400.

BTW this doesn't mean Canon cameras are bad, just that they are different from Nikon.


----------



## Atlasman (Oct 15, 2010)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p><strong>Time to address the questions
> 
> 
> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">I am getting a ton of questions regarding the 5D Mark II and how much longer itâ€™s going to be a current camera. While I obviously have nothing definitive, there are been a few pieces of information come my way in regards to a Canon roadmap.</span> </strong></p>
> ...



Even the 5D is a great camera. I traded mine to get the 7D and there are times when I question myself if it was a good decision.


----------



## bvukich (Oct 15, 2010)

c.d.embrey said:


> From Canon's recent actions I think the 5D III will be down graded, just like the 60D. This leaves room for a 7D like full frame (lets call it a 3D ;D ) that will sell for more than the 5D II.



That does make a lot of sense. The current lineup is approximately this:


Consumer Prosumer ProxxxxD xxxDxxD 7D1D5D​1Ds

A new FF would (obviously) need to be either above or below the 5D, like:

Consumer Prosumer ProxxxxD xxxDxxD 7D1D5D 3D​1Ds
*Or:*

Consumer Prosumer ProxxxxD xxxDxxD 7D1D9D 5D​1Ds

In my mind, either way, the build quality of the 5D series pretty much needs to change. But that being said, Canon will do whatever Canon decides to do. Everything here is pure speculation and wishfull thinking.


----------



## Justin (Oct 15, 2010)

I agree. Unless Canon tries to resegment the 5D lower in the lineup and introduce a 4, 3, or 2D. 

Otherwise I expect the 5D3 to be a killer 36x24mm sensor camera with the works: AF points and speed, high iso, big files with resolution to spare, new video features and optimizations. 

The camera that follows in the 1 series will be a game changer and will not compare to the 5D3 so differentiation between the segments won't be an issue anymore. The 5D3 will be everything that we wanted the 5D2 to be and a little more. The 1Ds4 or probably new name will be a beast. 





traveller said:


> Sorry, but I think you're all being way too conservative...
> 
> The specifications that people are suggesting for the 5D Mk3 are typically Canon, so I can see your points... But, Canon have allowed themselves to get into a position where Nikon have regained large amounts of market share by being far too tight with their feature set.
> 
> ...


----------



## L-Fletcher (Oct 15, 2010)

I think it's dangerous to try and predict the exact specifications of the 5D Mark III, particularly resolution. The 60D proved that (although logically, in retrospect, it does fit). 

But from what we've seen from a constant update of megapixels right across the board, on all their bodies, is that Canon is bound to increase the MP count in the 5D MK III; by how much, it's probably going to be hard to predict.

I'd say, personally:

- Anywhere between 24-28 MP
- Improved AF (chance of matching the 7D's system, but possibly not, considering the 5D range target market) system
- Digic 5 processor 
- 100% processor
- 4.5-5fps burst rate (depending on MP)
- SD/CF card slots
- Maybe improvements to build, but I doubt it will be as weather-sealed as the 7D, let alone the 1D MK IV
- 1080p 30/24fps HD video (but still with 5 min limit)


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 16, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> Well, Canon sure didn't heed that advice with the 60D...they churned out a package worse than the old one (but with 3 more megapixels - woot!).


So what's worse about it?

It's missing microadjustment and it's missing a magnesium alloy frame. It still has a pentaprism, has a top LCD, has a new sensor that adds more than just 3MP resolution, and they added a swivel screen. All this in a package that's $200 _less_ than the 50D launched for in 2008. Yes, you lose Compact Flash - I've not heard that the 60 MB/s transfer makes much difference for heat (like in video, which it doesn't have anyway), and CF is much more expensive for the capacity than the same size of SDHC cards anyway. The ergonomics of locking the mode dial and the wheel are controversial, but that's a design decision I think is separate from pricing.

I wrote the other day about people wanting not to pay less and get less than they want, but Canon has to set differences between models, else they would either have one camera too expensive for most to buy, or they would have a nearly infinite range of models with no differentiation. (Would make for some confusing logistics at the factory.)


c.d.embrey said:


> Nikon only builds *consumer* cameras and *pro* cameras. There isn't much difference between their pro models for things like weather sealing, metering and auto focus. The top of line D3x - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible and the bottom of the pro line D300s - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible. Canon would never do this, they worry about cannibalizing sales. And this is why a 7D will never be as good as a D400.


I think the reality is more nuanced than you admit. I don't see Canon ever having the rather x0D-ish "prosumer" tag to the 7D. The USA website's page for the 7D marks it for "serious photographers and semi-professionals." They want to have an APS-C camera for professionals, not just because APS-C chips are cheaper, but because the format offers extra reach with lenses. Somebody with a 5D or 1D series body may carry a 7D around as a second body, and Canon doesn't want to punish them for their purchase. The x0D line has been repositioned from semiprofessional or "prosumer" to "advanced amateur," though I don't see tons of changes myself, aside from the addition of a lot of new features and less emphasis on the old points that were thought to constitute a "pro" camera but which weren't adding new functionality (i.e. the magnesium alloy body) or advertising bullet points.

Other than that, I don't see your autofocus comparison providing your argument much support. Number of AF points has seemed to be going in Nikon's direction for a while - compare the D7000 and the Canon 60D, for example; the number and types of AF points was seen as a point in the D7000's favor there.

For Nikon's part, their USA website shows five tiers of cameras, with the D3x00 couple at the bottom. Perhaps they do fit cameras with just two levels of finish, but they sure don't spec and price them in just two tiers. The differences between the lower-end models in particular are quite varied.



Justin said:


> The camera that follows in the 1 series will be a game changer and will not compare to the 5D3 so differentiation between the segments won't be an issue anymore. The 5D3 will be everything that we wanted the 5D2 to be and a little more. The 1Ds4 or probably new name will be a beast.


I wouldn't be surprised if these new cameras you speak of just add some new features from the recent consumer releases, like the swivel screen from the 60D, in a body that otherwise has modernized specifications over their predecessors. The one obvious wild card is the idea of a 3D camera, which would be an obvious choice for a "3D" moniker, but I don't care about that and a lot of other folks don't, either. There's also the possibility of a mirrorless or semi-transparent (like the Sony Alpha A-55) camera but those strike me as again consumer-oriented cameras (at least at the beginning), even if they are EF compatible.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 16, 2010)

L. Fletcher said:


> I'd say, personally:
> 
> - Anywhere between 24-28 MP
> - Improved AF (chance of matching the 7D's system, but possibly not, considering the 5D range target market) system
> ...


I'm looking for it to be in the 30MP+ range actually.

Otherwise that looks pretty solid. 8 FPS bursts would be good, but I feel this is stretching the as-yet-unseen-DIGIC V a bit much  I share your concerns about the AF specification, though it feels safe to say it will at the very least match the 60D in autofocus - and the 60D is (per Osiris) said to be pretty good in that regard. AF sensor size differences aside, there doesn't seem to be a reason it should stick with the current underwhelming and outdated AF specification, nor why a camera $1000 more than the 7D should have inferior AF. After all, there's a lot of difference between the 1D / 1Ds cameras, with the 1D Mark IV having 45 autofocus points, and the 7D. Those are also 1.3x crop cameras, and they are better suited to telephoto and journalism applications - not to mention event photos, I'd think, so if Canon wants to differentiate, that's a reasonable place to start, rather than gutting the AF sensor of a 5D Mark III.

I am rather hoping 1080p is more than five minutes. They ought to have an improved codec, as well as a 60FPS mode. 24 and 30 FPS modes for 720p would be a good idea as well (why they've been cutting 30fps from their other cameras is beyond me - it's almost like they're sending a signal not to use the camera for video and to use a camcorder instead, but...but...) It may have an SDXC slot in addition to CF, which could bode well for video run times.


----------



## L-Fletcher (Oct 16, 2010)

I'd like to see SD card slots in the 5D MK III (I use SD cards for my smaller bodies), but it's quite possible that Canon will ignore it, like it did with the 7D.

I have no doubt, actually, that the 5D MK III will have 28-32MP, but personally I'm looking for not much more than 24-28MP.

I made a mistake when I mentioned the 5 minute limit - it should be 12 minutes (29 min total cut off). And it won't change, probably, due to the CF limits being its reason.

My actual predictions (realistically speaking):
- 28 to 32 MP
- Digic V processor
- Improved AF with 9-point focusing system 
- 100% viewfinder 
- 1080p at 24/25/30fps HD video (with 12 min. limit for 1080p)
- Dual CF card slots
- 4.5fps burst rate
- same magnesium-alloy body, no additional build improvements/weather-sealing (as the 5D MK II is already equal to the 7D in terms of weather-sealing)


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 16, 2010)

Edwin Herdman said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon only builds *consumer* cameras and *pro* cameras. There isn't much difference between their pro models for things like weather sealing, metering and auto focus. The top of line D3x - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible and the bottom of the pro line D300s - 51 focus points (including 15 cross-type sensors); AF fine tuning possible. Canon would never do this, they worry about cannibalizing sales. And this is why a 7D will never be as good as a D400.
> ...



The comparison is very simple. 

*The APS-C Canon 7D* "19-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 at center: Dual Cross Sensor)." *The Canon 1D IV* "All 45 AF points are horizontal-line sensitive at f/5.6 (vertical). Thirty-nine of the 45 AF points are vertical-line sensitive at f/2.8 for cross-type focusing." 

The Canon 7D does not use the same focusing as the Canon 1D IV. 

*The 5D II* "9 AF Points (1 Cross Type) + 6 AF Assist Points." *The 1Ds III* "45-point (19 high-precision cross-type AF points plus 26 Assist AF points)"

The Canon 5D II doesn't use the same focusing as the 1Ds III.

On the Nikon side the APS-C D300s, the full frame D700, full frame D3s and the $8000.00 full frame D3x all use the same 51 point focusing.

What's so hard to understand? Canon down grades the focusing for their lower cost cameras, Nikon doesn't. Simple as that!

The above may make little or no difference to you. Many 5D II shooters only use the center focus point.


----------



## richy (Oct 16, 2010)

Canon make cameras around all the same price points as nikon, ergo the whole nikon don't make prosumer cameras thing is just marketing. The 300 \ 700 is in the same ballpark as the 7d \ 5d. Nikon just market differently. 

Re the AF, yup but did nikon put the d3x sensor in the d700? They put their 'lower end pro(if that makes sense)' sensor in. So canon put a sensor from a body that costs 8k into the 5d2 yet nikon only put a sensor from a 4-5k body in their d700. That is why canon scuppered the AF. Also the AF motors in the d700 aren't as fast as the d3. Minor difference but it is there, else why would anyone buy a d3? For the d3\d3x and 1ds4 to sell for 2-3x the price as the d700&5d3 they have to be significantly better. Nikon chose not to put their best sensor in the d700, canon chose not to put their best AF in the 5d2. Want to shoot sports on a canon, prior to the 7d just get a 1d2 or 1d3 used. Want to shoot landscapes on a nikon, stitch. Both makers had to down spec their 'mid range \ pro sumer \ its pro honestly' cameras otherwise it would kill sales of their top lines. 

I would love to see truly crazy specced cheap cameras, and specs do evolve, but pining for a $2500 camera thats an amalgam of all the best parts of $4000 and $8000 cameras seems a little optimistic  I would love it, it would slash my capex, but really, put yourself in the position of trying to sell that to canons board. Yeah I want to completely destroy the sales of our two flagship cameras by drastically undercutting them in price whilst offering virtually all the same features. 

A decent amount of money for canon comes from pro's, probably not as much as from rebels, but we still spend 10-40k a year probably each. They know we will make purchases mostly based on a business case. There would be virtually no business case for a 1ds4 if the 5d3 was that good. I truly wish it was, because it either means I get a great camera cheap, or the 1ds4 has to come with dancing girls and a lifetime supply of la grande annee. Either way its all good. 

I just canon would grow a pair and release their roadmap for a rolling 12 months. It wouldn't be fast enough for nikon to react to as cameras can take 24-36 months to come to market, and it would allow pros to budget during and between financial years which is important. 

Take care  

PS- I wish they would sell a more expensive 7d and 5d2 with the 5 minute video thing removed. Crazies. I know its to protect their video line. But I don't want to carry extra stuff and having both in one makes sense even if it costs more.


----------



## L-Fletcher (Oct 16, 2010)

richy said:


> PS- I wish they would sell a more expensive 7d and 5d2 with the 5 minute video thing removed. Crazies. I know its to protect their video line. But I don't want to carry extra stuff and having both in one makes sense even if it costs more.


As I corrected myself and mentioned above: there's no 5 minute limit. It's 12 minutes at 1080p and 24~ mins at 4:3 640x480. 

5 minutes is the Nikon D90's limit.


----------



## Etienne (Oct 16, 2010)

I don't have many wishes for the 5DIII:

Better auto-focus
Better high ISO: too much banding in 5DII, noise could be more grain-like
Improved video features: better AF, dedicated buttons, less moire/jello, how about rack auto-focussing (that would be awesome, and could be done with firmware in 5DII)

MP is fine,
build quality is ok


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 16, 2010)

c.d.embrey said:


> The comparison is very simple.


Informative, but still nothing touching my major point. I was wrong to suggest that Nikon hasn't been consistent with specifications on its SLRs, like the AF point counts which have been remarkably stable regardless of the year or price (you'd think they could make it better as time goes on...but Canon has to catch up first, right?). On the Canon side my point is that AF module "downgrading" is only relative to other cameras in the contemporary lineup. By the time a 5D Mark III comes out, the 7D will be a year old. The 5D Mark II's autofocus sensor is similar enough to the original 5D's, and it's simply time for a change. The 5D line is apart from the "prosumer" or advanced amateur etc. lines, and it's separate from the 1D / 1Ds / 1.3x crop lines as well.

It certainly can use autofocus at least as good as the 7D, but in truth it needs to be considerably better than that. The 5D Mark III (or whatever occupies the line) really needs continuous autofocus in movie mode, for example, given the camera's use for filmmaking, which try as they might Canon can't sway users to the more expensive 1.3x crop cameras for. Unless Canon is hoping to aim people towards a new line entirely, or a different kind of product (like camcorders), they will simply lose a lot of friends if the AF system stays stagnant.

For what it's worth, the 7D's 19 cross-type sensors ought to beat (at least for photographs) the more impressive-sounding 51 point AF sensor-equipped cameras, when those like the D700 and D300S have 15 cross type. By the "Nikon only builds two tiers" theory, the D7000 is placed at the very top of the low end, with just 9 cross-type sensors, 39 overall. Not a bad argument given its price.

On the lower-tier cameras Nikon hasn't been shy about holding down costs - and cutting features: The Multi-CAM1000 AF sensor in the D3100, released almost at the same time as the D7000, has just 11 points, none of them cross-type. Even my poor old T1i has a cross-type sensor.


----------



## Flake (Oct 16, 2010)

There's a lot more to autofocus than the number of cross points, I'm afraid there are plenty of people who believe that the 5D MkII & the original one have a better AF system than the xxD cameras.

There's no way Canon would cheapen the 5D brand by using a plastic body. Everything in there is packed pretty tight. and if you believe Canons excuse then there's not even enough room for a larger autofocus sensor. The probable reason the 5D MkII didn't get a better AF is because all its engineers were trying yo sort the 1D AF debacle.

Many Pros moved to Nikon for sports purely because of the 1D AF issues, not because of the sensor, and not because of superior image quality. As for magazine covers being shot on various cameras well if they're that good might as well junk the Hasselblad, the D3x and the 1Ds, because they're all pretty pointless. Why spend upwards of Â£25K on a system when you can do it for Â£500? But why stop there? Magazine covers have been shot on a G10 !


If the only people buying camera equipment were pro's then the camera companies would have gone out of business years ago. Of course the majority of cameras sold, and the majority of a camera companies income is from the entry models, and most are first time buyers who are hugely influenced by reviewers. Just to give an example What Digital Camera rated the Nikon 70 - 200mm f/2.8 VR II as a better lens than Canons IS MkII purely on the grounds of the cost of the two lenses at the time of the review the Nion's price was quoted at Â£1630 and the Canon which had been very recently released as Â£2200. The street price for the Nikon is now Â£1600 and the Canon at Â£1670. No explanation or caveat as to the Canon's seeming Â£500 extra cost was given and the whole review was predicated on this price. Proof that reviewers can be strongly biased to one brand over another. 

Every other properly condicted objective review has the Canon as a slightly better performer than the Nikon, have a look at Dpreview.


----------



## oalali (Oct 16, 2010)

*My wish list*

Here is my wish list:

a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.
dual digic IV (or V).
5-7 frames per second
Canon 1ds autofocus system . (to set it apart from the current 1d bodies)
same form factor and weather sealing as the current model.

8)


----------



## Waleed Essam (Oct 16, 2010)

God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.


----------



## Flake (Oct 16, 2010)

*Re: My wish list*



oalali said:


> Here is my wish list:
> 
> a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.
> dual digic IV (or V).
> ...



Why don't you just buy a 1Ds MkIII then?


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Oct 16, 2010)

And here's the winning and most-likely 5D3 spec, hats off to you sir 8):



Waleed Essam said:


> God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.
> 
> I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.
> 
> ...


----------



## Flake (Oct 16, 2010)

Waleed Essam said:


> God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.
> 
> I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.
> 
> ...




It is much more difficult than you realise! The sensor is so significantly larger that the casre has to be completely redesigned to accommodate the shutter & mirror mechanism, then there's the pentaprism which is also significantly larger. Plus another issue which doesn't seem to get much discussion and that is the flatness & alignment of the FF sensor & the 5D MkII has had more than a few issues with miss aligned sensors. Because thes FF unit is so much larger it suffers dissproportionately from miss alignment in both the vertical & more in the horizontal axis, but it also suffers from warping & rippling, caused by the heating & cooling of the silicon wafers in the manufacturing process. One company has calimed that it can produce sensors which are perfectly aligned (can't remember who though!)

ISO 12800 is not a real Iso, it is a sofware one where the camera uses Iso 6400 increases the shitter speed and then drags the exposure back by software. High Iso performance is desireable in a digital camera, because dynamic range is the difference between clipping & the noise floor, hence there is a higher dynamic range on a High Iso performing camera.

So no chance of putting it into a 7D body, it's not much larger anyway!


----------



## Jarveye (Oct 16, 2010)

anyone care to estimate a date when we will know the real spec? either by announcement or a likely time when canon wont be able to prevent a leak of info?


----------



## traveller (Oct 16, 2010)

Canon is caught in a trap of its own making, as much as Nikon's. 

They can't produce a D700-like camera because they have no fast pro-level full frame model and are (rightly) worried that a lot of pros would choose such a camera over the 1D Mk4. Similarly, the AF system in the 7D is of lower spec than the 1D series because they are afraid that an 8fps, 18MP APS-C model would be too good an alternative to a 16MP APS-H 1D Mk4 for many users considering purchasing the latter. Had the 1D Mk4 been planned to be full frame, I believe that the 7D would probably have shared its AF system and the 60D would have got some sort of 19pt system (maybe not all cross type). 

So now, Canon have some tough choices for the next generation and what they decide for the high end models will impact upon the lower end cameras. Should they continue to push APS-H in the 1D line, or go full frame? This isn't an easy decision for them to make; many people seem to like the 1.3 crop as a good compramise that gives them more reach with lighter lenses. But the D3s has shown people what a lower-resolution full frame sensor is capable of and I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C). If the next 1D goes full frame, it will free up the cameras below it to be better, without stealing its market.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 16, 2010)

> I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).



Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor? If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.


----------



## x-vision (Oct 16, 2010)

traveller said:


> Canon is caught in a trap of its own making, as much as Nikon's.



Agree 100% with your analysis.
Itâ€™s interesting what Canon will decide about the 1.3x format. 

No matter how many megapixels a 1.3x camera has, it is bound to remain a specialized sports camera - good if you have a big white lens bolted on it, not so good otherwise. 
At the same time, if Nikonâ€™s D4 has 20+ megapixels, it will be an excellent general purpose pro camera, not just a sports camera. 
If Canon continues with the 1.3x format, they will be competing with a specialized pro camera vs a general purpose pro camera. 
The specialized camera seems to be at a disadvantage here. 

So, it does make sense for Canon to move the 1D series to FF. 
The thing is, this already made sense back in 2007 and yet Canon did not do it when the 1DIII was released. 

But if Canon does decide to move the 1D series to FF, some very interesting opportunities will open up for the 5DIII and the 7DII.


----------



## x-vision (Oct 16, 2010)

unfocused said:


> > I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).
> 
> 
> 
> Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor? If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.



Agree. 
At the same time, a 1.3x camera will always be a specialized camera, no matter how many megapixels is has.


----------



## traveller (Oct 16, 2010)

unfocused said:


> > I think that Canon will soon reach the end of what is possible with APS-H (as they are now with APS-C).
> 
> 
> 
> Would that limit be the new Canon 120mp APS-H sensor? If so, I think they still have a lot of room between the current 16mp and 120mp to play with in all their sensor formats.



http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Difficult subject. 

Be careful when using the calculator on this page as (just like his excellent hyperfocal distance calculator) the assumptions you make about print size, viewing distance and eyesight make a huge difference. 

I would assume quite a large print size (why the heck else would you want a 120 MP camera?), better than manufacturers' standard eysight assumption (unless you wear glasses and regularly view prints without them on). Viewing distance is up to you: 

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/megapixel_myth/index.html

Versus: 

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/megapixel_myth/index.html

Have fun!


----------



## traveller (Oct 16, 2010)

Re. Last post... something strange happened to my browser address bar! This is the second link that I meant to copy-paste:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/print_viewing_distance.html


----------



## Flake (Oct 16, 2010)

(why the heck else would you want a 120 MP camera?)

Imagine this scene, a 42" touch sensitive screen inside a Police van during a riot, the operator touches the screen at a trouble spot and there's an image capture of a trouble maker captured. Or perhaps at a sports event where the camera is set back far enough to see the whole field of play, touch the screen and an image is taken.

You might say this is not photography, but these are the applications envisaged for such high MP sensors. In addition people say what build a racing car that will go so fast, well those developments find their way into theh everyday consumer applications. I'm happy that Canon are spending money pushing technology to its limits, I bought into a system and it's nice to know that to some extent it's going to be some what 'future proof'.


----------



## richy (Oct 16, 2010)

I guess the same folks who bought that 50mp sensor that canon made but never sold to the public, the spooks and banks will have had some. 120mp sensors would be awesome in a bank \ reserve security application


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 17, 2010)

Flake said:


> There's a lot more to autofocus than the number of cross points [...]


Agreed with this and the rest of the post.


traveller said:


> I would assume quite a large print size (why the heck else would you want a 120 MP camera?)


Low light performance, and oversampling is good (when it can be done correctly - a 120MP sensor wouldn't help aliasing in movies versus current sensors, it would make it worse in fact).


----------



## oalali (Oct 17, 2010)

*Re: My wish list*



Flake said:


> oalali said:
> 
> 
> > Here is my wish list:
> ...




Because:
1)	1Ds is three years old and still manages to cost an arm or leg to buy.
2)	it is bulky & doesnâ€™t have a video function.
3)	putting the MP count a side, Nikon Managed to do so with their D700. So I donâ€™t think that it will cost Canon anymore to do it.
4)	if Iâ€™m going to wish then Iâ€™m going to wish for what I want and not what think Canon will release.


----------



## Waleed Essam (Oct 17, 2010)

Flake said:


> Waleed Essam said:
> 
> 
> > God, I just want a FF 7D... that's all I'm asking for.
> ...



I don't think what I said has to mean EXACT same body.. by body you mean specs, sealing, AF, etc.
So what if they need to make it slightly bigger to accommodate the FF sensor? Remember the price difference between both cameras -on release- is about 1000$. I'm not a sensor engineer but I really believe 1000$ more can pay for the different in sensor size and extra adjustments to body size this might need.

And don't you think everybody who uses a dSLR by now know's that 12800 is not a real ISO, I don't understand what does this has to do with anything. And also, it's not CURRENTLY a real ISO, it will be real soon in future cameras like the 6400 has become compared to older cameras.

About Sensor miss-alignment, I honestly dont know any information about this, but this also has nothing to do with putting a FF sensor in a 7D (like) body, since it's in the manufacturing process of the sensor, not the body!

Anyways, to make what I meant by my original post more obvious:

I just wish the 5DIII to have all the specs of the 7D in addition to a tweaked FF sensor in the same range od 21 mpix, and I'm illing to pay 2600-2700 USD for it on release


----------



## richy (Oct 17, 2010)

*Re: My wish list*



oalali said:


> 4)	if Iâ€™m going to wish then Iâ€™m going to wish for what I want and not what think Canon will release.



ohhh okies  that sounds like fun. I'll go for a 6x7 40mp sensor with anti dust and some IS lenses to go with it.
Nothing too stupid, just a decent landscape \ portrait camera. 1-2fps would be fine. 7d af a must


----------



## davidpeter (Oct 17, 2010)

It has been discussed here earlier, so please allow me to have a few words in connection with D700 vs 5DmkII.

I shoot low light events (weddings, sports such as martial arts, basketball and hockey, concerts) and let me say: the non-1 series bodies of Canon are far behind Nikon. I tried the 7D and the 5D mark II, but sold all my canon gear for a Nikon D700 and some lenses (70-200 f2.8 VR, 24-70 f2.8 instead of the same Canons). I could not be happier. It just works! 

I think Canon is on the wrong way with the increasing MP count and with the decreasing features...


----------



## L-Fletcher (Oct 17, 2010)

YMMV. 

Indeed, it is a tad annoying that Canon feels it necessary to raise the resolution for each newly-released body, but the 5D MK II does excel in the studio. That said, it also holds up well for landscape/fine art/weddings/events in general - it handles noise well, considering that it has less than 3 million pixels off twice that of the D700 (said in a confusing way ).


----------



## davidpeter (Oct 17, 2010)

Yep, I mean underperforming. For example auto focus. The AF of th 5D series is simply insufficient for sports and barely usable on low light concerts. I tried, I failed. Perhaps it is my fault, perhaps not, bit facts are simple: the D700 just works. I prefer the Nikon ergonomics too, especially the flash control, the AF switch button and the programmable auto ISO. They are awesome! 

I never needed the 20+ MP count. The one and only feature I miss is the beautiful video. I need nothing but my stills for my job, but I enjoyed playing with the video. Both the 5 and the 7 could do that fine.

However, throwing away them and start a new life worth that cost.


----------



## richy (Oct 17, 2010)

Its just a choive. The 5d2 af is good but not excellent. The d700 lacks the res for large prints. Just pick which one suits you  Saying the 5d2 af doesnt work in low light is like saying a ferrari isnt great for hauling cement, really ??  The 5d2 is a budget portrait \ landscape camera and in that context it rocks, the 7d is a budget sports camera and rocks, the d700 is a budget all rounder and again it rocks but it isn't perfect and as someone else pointed out the 5d2 has nearly twice the pixel count. They already made a 5d2 with great af, the 1ds3  
Its great canon and nikon took different approaches as you can have a choice.


----------



## Osiris30 (Oct 18, 2010)

Hey guys,

Here's a thought.. at 28mp Canon could actually have a low-light pixel binning mode at 7MP which significantly less noise.. Food for thought (or will they reserve that for the 1Ds?).

Osiris


----------



## x-vision (Oct 18, 2010)

With a Bayer sensor a 2:1 binning (14mp) is good enough. A special color-filter arrangement is needed, though. 

It would also be nice if Canon implements in-camera crops modes - 5:4, 1.2x, etc.. 
Good solution for reducing file size in cases where full resolution is not needed.


----------



## Osiris30 (Oct 18, 2010)

x-vision said:


> With a Bayer sensor a 2:1 binning (14mp) is good enough. A special color-filter arrangement is needed, though.
> 
> It would also be nice if Canon implements in-camera crops modes - 5:4, 1.2x, etc..
> Good solution for reducing file size in cases where full resolution is not needed.



But if I'm not mistaken (and it's far too late for me to do the math) isn't a 4:1 *far* easier to implement and would it not offer significantly better snr than a 2:1 bin, without needing to redo the CFA layout and that risking other weird problems.

Cheers,
O


----------



## Flake (Oct 18, 2010)

I've had the 5D MkII out in the dark against a D700, and 70 - 200mm f/2.8 sigma lenses on both of them. The Nikon refused to focus where the 5D MkII carried on albeit a bit slower than normal.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 21, 2010)

Flake said:


> I've had the 5D MkII out in the dark against a D700, and 70 - 200mm f/2.8 sigma lenses on both of them. The Nikon refused to focus where the 5D MkII carried on albeit a bit slower than normal.



But...but...the D700 has over 5 times the number of AF points. So the Nikon AF has to be better, right??


----------



## unexposure (Oct 21, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> Flake said:
> 
> 
> > I've had the 5D MkII out in the dark against a D700, and 70 - 200mm f/2.8 sigma lenses on both of them. The Nikon refused to focus where the 5D MkII carried on albeit a bit slower than normal.
> ...


I guess, the autofocus-feature on 5d mkII is rather a nice "giveaway" from canon, rather than really needed for the typical usage of the camera. It should just make it some more flexible. ;-)

- When using it for Movies (and this is probably the most obvious) you don't need an af. 
- When using it for studiowork, you'll have all the time in the world to set a properly focus manually. As mkII tethered usage performs quite well, it's, in my opinion, the far superior method to focus manually than letting the af do the photographers job.
- When doing (wide) Landscape, there's in 9 out of 10 cases only one applicable setting to your focus-ring.
- When doing (narrower) Landscape and makro-stuff, manually focussing while in live-view and tripod-using has proven do be a good choise, regarding precision. 

So for most cases, you would consider making use of a 5d mkII, it's probably the better option to do manual focus.

For shooting stuff like Wildlife the crop-cams are (due to the longer focal-length) far superior. 7d is, in this case also a better choise over 5d because of some few more fps...
For shooting sports it might either be the best choise to get a 1d-body or go with the 7d, as burst-rate is far superior compared to 5d mkII. 
And in both cases - either 1d oder 7d - you get LOADS of more af-points of which you can actually make use of! 

(don't take this whole post from me to serious!!!)


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 22, 2010)

dilbert said:


> I can only imagine that there must be core logic choices that are embedded by the camera that are not trivial to make dynamic without redesigning the hardware and firmware.


I think it's simply that their programmers are busy elsewhere, or perhaps the company is lazy about these things (wanting to sell you cameras with auto ISO - conspiracy theorists might detect a plot to sell the 5D Mark III brewing, in that they don't want the Mark III to seem like a small, safe refresh of the Mark II). Maybe both, but we have just gotten a couple firmware updates for other cameras, and the 5D Mark II's one shouldn't have been held back for the sake of adding in and testing some auto ISO features.

Given what I've read about Canon firmware - it's basically the camera's operating software on the main logic board, with other parts acting independently as devices, the firmware is updated all in one go (or perhaps piecemeal, but they still don't have any kind of automatic recovery to a good firmware like cheap PC BIOSes have). I doubt they've run out of space in the camera's internal memory; they give the firmware room to grow in case fixes or new features are needed.

Of course, it could be something like what you say, and there may be some assumptions in the code about how ISO is adjusted or limited that would make adding the user limit very involved. But I tend to think that it could be as simple as adjusting the limit which is normally the upper level of sensitivity. Of course, right now we already have something rather like Auto ISO limit in that you can select ISO expansion...the interface is just a bit clunky (at least on the T1i, heh heh).


----------

