# EOS 3Dor 5DIII rumor update at Northern Light Images?



## pedro (Aug 11, 2010)

As one can read over at Northern Light Images: _"We're told that a 3D is on its way early next year. No mention of MP, but 'low light' was a key feature. This is meant to be 'Pro level'. Details in the comments lead me to think that this is not the same as mentioned at CR - however I've been getting mails like this since 2005, and most reliable ones have been precursors of what was the 5D and 5D mk2"_
What do you think? Is it something in relation to a 5DIII or the Hybrid mentioned over here?


----------



## that1guy (Aug 12, 2010)

Well, I'm kind of a pessimist when it comes to the 3D. I think it is a pipe dream for many of us (myself included  ) and I've heard it mentioned off and on so many times that I am now in a "I'll believe it when I see it" kind of mood. That being said, maybe there is something to what they were saying about it being the next 5D...especially since similar things happened before each of the other 5Ds were announced.

Aren't most people guessing that the 5D replacement will be early next year sometime? When did the 5D II get released? To me, the timing sounds right for a 5D...but I'm no expert


----------



## pedro (Aug 12, 2010)

You are right. I would warmly welcome a 5DIII instead of a mythical 3D as it kinda remains within my saving up schedule (even though it could be priced slightly higher due to enhanced features); while I am heading FF currently using an excellent 30D.


----------



## that1guy (Aug 12, 2010)

I'm still sitting on my 20D and waiting  I've just been putting money into lenses because honestly, that is where you really see the difference in your photos. Plus, if I do get a nice FF, I will need some good glass for it. 

Whether it is a 3D or 5D, the next cheap FF is what I will be watching for very intently.


----------



## gkreis (Aug 12, 2010)

that1guy said:


> I'm still sitting on my 20D and waiting  I've just been putting money into lenses because honestly, that is where you really see the difference in your photos. Plus, if I do get a nice FF, I will need some good glass for it.
> 
> Whether it is a 3D or 5D, the next cheap FF is what I will be watching for very intently.



Smart... the 20D was an amazing camera when it came out and it continues to do well years later from what I hear folks say.


----------



## that1guy (Aug 12, 2010)

^yep, it's worked well for me. I try to not upgrade unless the thing I am upgrading to solves a problem that I need solved (that goes for camera bodies as well as lenses). Honestly I haven't found a compelling FF solution yet that solves the things that I need (the 7D would have been my solution if I were looking for an aps-c sensor). I nearly got the 5DII, but found out about the AF on it and so I bought a 70-200 2.8 IS instead. Best decision I ever made (photographically of course).


----------



## pedro (Aug 13, 2010)

good argument. as mentioned above: I am about to go FF but 5DII's AF was a point. Cannot afford a 7k+ body to have that resolved, so there's some hope in the next 5D. yepp, good glass makes the difference. we're on the same track then.


----------



## gkreis (Aug 13, 2010)

pedro said:


> good argument. as mentioned above: I am about to go FF but 5DII's AF was a point. Cannot afford a 7k+ body to have that resolved, so there's some hope in the next 5D. yepp, good glass makes the difference. we're on the same track then.



I have found that even mediocre glass does a lot better on focus if tuned to your camera at Canon. My 40D doesn't have the microfocus feature and my 17-85mm was very soft (back focusing). I had Canon adjust it and WOW. It was amazing. I had them do the same for my 10-22 and my 70-300 (my least favorite lens). I plan to get my first L lens this year to experience the better color and contrast that I've heard others go on about, but I found that tuning the lens and body together can make a world of difference for sharpness. It was like getting a new camera rig...


----------



## Chindog (Aug 16, 2010)

I am with you on the 20D, i have been sitting on my 30D for a few years. No compelling reason to upgrade as yet, likewise been putting my money into glass. 70-200 F2.8 IS is the best thing i have ever spent money on and the 24-70 F2.8 a close second, i take a couple of hundred photos during a shoot and it makes it hard to chose the keepers as they all come out great. 

Even if i do upgrade at some stage the 30D will always be sitting there, has been a great camera and never faulted (even when dropped by my wife, my Sigma 24-70 did not fair so well when dropped though).


----------



## Jan (Aug 17, 2010)

Same for me and my 400D.
Nevertheless I'm curious about a 3D or 5dMkIII or let's say: every new camera...


----------



## dthomasla (Aug 31, 2010)

With the announcement of the 60D is there any possibility that the 5Dlll could still be announced at Photokina in September? 

I want a FF and can onlly afford the 5Dll, but I don't want to purchase it if there are only a few months left in its product cycle. 

On the other hand I've been using a 40D for 3 years and I think that my photography could improve substantially if I used any 5D however, I definitely don't want to wait 6-8 months for the 5Dlll.


----------



## NormanBates (Aug 31, 2010)

dilbert said:


> One of the big problems with the crop cameras is that your lens choice for wide angle (less than 16mm so that after crop it is under 24mm) are very limited and there are no high quality (L) lenses available in this segment.



well, the tokina 11-16 is quite good, not expensive at all, and can even work in a full frame camera (as a 14-16 or so)


----------



## that1guy (Aug 31, 2010)

dilbert said:


> that1guy said:
> 
> 
> > I'm still sitting on my 20D and waiting  I've just been putting money into lenses because honestly, that is where you really see the difference in your photos. Plus, if I do get a nice FF, I will need some good glass for it.
> ...



Yup, that's true. One of the bummers for crop cameras. I personally don't shoot very much (at all) wide angle stuff. My widest lens is a 24mm which converts to a 38mm...not very wide. I mostly shoot portraits so I get by. I figure when I get my FF finally, that 24mm will look _real _wide  I might also consider the 16-50 that is rumored (if they actually make it) as that would give me a lot wider view than I am currently used to, and still work on a FF later. Of course, that is just a rumor, and I do need to keep saving since I don't currently have enough for a FF yet.

Honestly, even more than the wide angles, I am looking forward to being able to use my 70-200 2.8 in more confined spaces. I love that lens, but sometimes it is just a bit too long on my 20D.


----------



## Peerke (Aug 31, 2010)

Guys, never heard of the Sigma 8-16? It has an amazing angle of 118 (the widest FF is the Sigma 12-24 with an angle of 122) and this 8-16 is sharp according the reviews.

So no need for a FF if you want to go wide. If you want the better IQ, ok go for FF, but if you just want to go wide, buy the ..... You get my point.


----------



## that1guy (Aug 31, 2010)

That's true ^ but I've never personally had good luck w/ or been impressed w/ Sigma lenses. I'm sure it depends on the copy you get, the quality level you buy, etc etc (and to be fair, I have not used their pro lenses, but I've tried midrange zooms and their 100 ish macro)...but it's just a personal thing. I'm sure others have had awesome luck/results with them. Personally, I have always had better luck w/ Tamron or Canon.

Either way, I'm not much of a wide angle guy anyway, like I said. Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that (or even w/ the 16-35 or the 17-40).


----------



## unexposure (Aug 31, 2010)

that1guy said:


> Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that.


If you are fine with (pretty little) ca in the (very) wide end, go for a tokina 16-50 f2.8. From 18mm on, IQ is very nice and from my point of view the nearest competitor to the ef-s 17-55 f2.8 - and the price difference is about 500$...


----------



## that1guy (Sep 1, 2010)

unexposure said:


> that1guy said:
> 
> 
> > Even on a crop frame, I would be ok w/ a 16-50 if they ever made that.
> ...


Sounds interesting. Will it work on a FF camera?


----------



## unexposure (Sep 1, 2010)

that1guy said:


> unexposure said:
> 
> 
> > that1guy said:
> ...


Nope. EF-S-Mount (same as the canon).


----------



## bradj (Sep 1, 2010)

that1guy said:


> I nearly got the 5DII, but found out about the AF on it and so I bought a 70-200 2.8 IS instead.



What AF issue on the 5dII are you alluding to please?
thanks,
Brad.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Sep 2, 2010)

bradj said:


> that1guy said:
> 
> 
> > I nearly got the 5DII, but found out about the AF on it and so I bought a 70-200 2.8 IS instead.
> ...


I happened to come across this on Vincent LaForet's new "My Gear" section - the cameras article found here. Quote:


> Lastly - the autofocus system (for still photographers) is the same system that was found in the original 5D - therefore it is close to 5 years old relative to newer systems.


Now, that's not an explicit criticism, however, implicitly you can read that compared to newer designs it's a bit outclassed. The 5D Mark II has "9 AF points, one cross type, with six AF assist points" (according to Canon's website). Compare this to the 1D Mark IV, which has 45 points; the 5D's spec is similar to the T1i / T2i which both have 9 AF points with one being cross type. 60D also has 9 points with the middle being an "extra sensitive" cross type in the middle.

So how does that translate into missed shots? Your guess is as good as mine...I'm sure one can find anecdotes either way. But I hope that at least gives context for why people will be claiming that on paper the camera is no good...heh.


----------



## that1guy (Sep 3, 2010)

dilbert said:


> bradj said:
> 
> 
> > that1guy said:
> ...



Well, I am a pixel peeper and I need to be because I get paid for some of the work I do. Micro stock sites won't accept soft images, and my portrait clients aren't crazy about it either. But that is a pretty narrow explanation and not nearly the whole reason.

It is true that the 5dii is pretty much the same AF as the 5D, and the 5d's is nearly the same as my 20D, and like I said before (can't remember in this post or another) but I only like to upgrade if a camera (or lens) solves a problem I've bumped up against, not just because something is the newest best version, or because I think it's "nifty". 

So what was wrong w/ the 5D AF? Well, I would personally like something faster. I photograph a lot of kids and the way I photograph them is to let them run around and do their thing. While I am able to get sharp photos, at times I know that I have also missed a few because I did not have an AF system that could track faster or more accurately. Obviously, you don't need it all the time, but if it would help me out, then I should wait for it, right? Others I know who shoot landscape, studio stuff (product or portrait), and adult portraits rarely have a problem with it as they rely a lot more on the center AF point and have time to recompose. Kids are just a bit quicker 

Also, the outside AF points are not as accurate. I experience this w/ my 20D, I've experienced it w/ the 5D, and I've heard reports of it w/ the 5DII from multiple people (and photographers I trust, not just some random forum people). If a kid is moving it is really hard to focus with the center point and then recompose (if you want the kid to the side of the frame for instance) and get a crisp shot. Even if you are not a pixel peeper you can get shots that would not be acceptable for prints. As a portrait photographer, you need to make sure your client can print the images you give them at any size they would want.

I actually don't care too much about whether I get 15, 39, 51, or 133 AF points. I'm quite ok w/ 9, as long as they are spaced well and all accurate. That said, I would have liked it if the 5Dii had its af points spaced out a bit more. It always felt cramped shooting the 5D.

So those are the AF things that I was talking about. As I said...they aren't a deal breaker for most people, but for me (even though I really want FF) it was just not enough. Everyone has different needs as a photographer, the trick is to figure out what your needs are and not what someone else (like me) tells you your needs are. If you are considering a 5Dii, I would recommend either renting one, or seeing if you can borrow one from a friend. Heck, if you know someone w/ a 5D you could try that out too. Just see if you like it. If you do and it works for you, then who cares what I thought of the camera  Hope that helps clear up my statement 

Edited for clarity (hopefully : ) and to add this: in hindsight, even if the 5dii's AF would have ended up being as good as a 1D series, it was still a better move for me to get the lens . The two lenses that I got while I was waiting have made a much bigger difference in my photos than a better camera (even w/ a fast AF and FF sensor) could have ever done.


----------



## Grendel (Sep 3, 2010)

Seems that a lot of people don't know this: "The AF system on the EOS 5D Mark II includes 9 visible AF points and six invisible assist points, for a total 15 points concentrated toward the center. [..] The purpose of the supplemental points is to enhance the cameraâ€™s subject tracking performance by filling in the gaps between the highly sensitive central AF point and the 8 adjacent linear sensors."

Edit: And: "[5DII] The outer points on the extreme left and right are actually located at the same positions as the corresponding points in the EOS-1Ds Mark III, giving the camera a wide field for detecting moving subjects crossing the scene or improved ability to focus on off-center subjects."


----------



## that1guy (Sep 4, 2010)

Yeah, just like the 5D: "The EOS 5D camera has a new 9-point AF unit
with six Supplemental AF points, a new AF
algorithm and new AF circuitry."
5D whitepaper here: www.usa.canon.com/uploadedimages/FCK/.../EOS_5D_WP.pdf
(unless I missed something...if so, my loss  )

Sounds the same as the original 5D, and from the picture, it didn't look like the assist points made the AF area any wider. That was one of the problems I had w/ the 5D. Maybe I missunderstood the pictures, but I would like them to be wider and cover more of the view finder. Like I said, I actually tried the 5D and it just wasn't enough for me to part w/ more money. No big deal. Beautiful camera, beautiful images, but not enough of an AF upgrade/solution for me. My money (and again, just saying this was the way it was for my situation) was better spent on lenses at that time. 

Honestly, if they don't upgrade the AF w/ the next model, then I will probably just get that model anyway since I have a nice set of lenses now, and I will probably need a camera by then.

BTW- thanks for the link and the image...it is helpful


----------



## fotoworx (Sep 4, 2010)

I've personally never found the AF on my 5DMKII to be lacking.


----------



## that1guy (Sep 4, 2010)

fotoworx said:


> I've personally never found the AF on my 5DMKII to be lacking.



Thanks for sharing that, fotoworx  Great example of how not everyone has the same needs. I think I might have made it sound like it was a horrid AF system, when all I was doing was pointing out the specific reasons it didn't work _for me personally._ Hopefully Brad isn't completely turned off on the camera (if he was even looking for one...heck, I think I was just assuming that...sorry if I was incorrect, Brad.) 

I think so much in photography depends on personal preference and shooting style. Fotoworx and thousands of 5D mkII owners have no problem w/ the camera and love it. If you are considering one, Brad, I would really recommend renting or borrowing one and trying it out for yourself. If it does what you need it to do, then who cares what I thought, right?  

Other people's opinions are just that...our opinions. They are valuable for getting a general feel for how something works, but ultimately, we each need to just get what we like and decide for ourselves. Really sorry if it sounded like I was shredding the 5DII :-[


----------



## Grendel (Sep 5, 2010)

Actually I did forget to mention that -- I don't have any problems w/ my 5DIIs AF system either. But then I don't use the tracking feature, for sports etc. I use a 7D (for the longer reach mainly. I usually pre-focus.)


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Sep 5, 2010)

that1guy said:


> Honestly, if they don't upgrade the AF w/ the next model, then I will probably just get that model anyway since I have a nice set of lenses now, and I will probably need a camera by then.


It's a safe bet that it will be upgraded. Unless Canon pulls a segment repositioning maneuver with the 5D's successor even more dramatic than the 60D's, it'd be very strange for them to leave the full-frame model with 15 AF points in-between models that have 45 points (1D Mark IV) and 19 (on the 7D all are cross-type; on the 5D Mark II only one is).


----------

