# Will the suggested 5d III specs satisfy your photograpy needs?



## birdman (Feb 23, 2012)

I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious. 

Maybe I will keep my 5dII, which I am content with, and invest in new glass to be released soon. This may be my best bet. I just hate to keep a depreciating asset when I could afford to sell and upgrade for about $1,000--the price I would get for my D7000 that I never shoot. AF is not important to me because I do 90% landscapes. But I will withhold judgement until the "Official" release. We could be in for a huge surprise.


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 23, 2012)

birdman said:


> I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious.
> 
> Maybe I will keep my 5dII, which I am content with, and invest in new glass to be released soon. This may be my best bet. I just hate to keep a depreciating asset when I could afford to sell and upgrade for about $1,000--the price I would get for my D7000 that I never shoot. AF is not important to me because I do 90% landscapes. But I will withhold judgement until the "Official" release. We could be in for a huge surprise.



I wouldn't try comparing the two solely based on MP, if you did that one would be led to the assumption that a 5DII was superior to the 1D Mark IV (since it's only 16MP or whatever). It's been almost 4 years since the 5DII was announced, I'm sure there will be some huge improvements (MP aside). 

For Canon to bring out a highly-anticipated camera with only a 1MP increase just doesn't make sense, I think there is something we don't know about this cam that we will be finding out soon. 

Oh and to answer your question, yes, I think it will satisfy my photography needs. The 5DII satisfies my photography needs, so I don't see why the new one wouldn't. Then again I don't know anything about it aside from rumor specs and I've never seen images from it and I've never used it, so it's kinda hard to say.


----------



## Minnesota Nice (Feb 23, 2012)

It easily fits my needs for photography, but I use my DSLR for video as well and I want something more than the standard 1080p @ 30/24 and 720p @ 60 fps. It's not exactly in my budget to buy a Phantom Flex or a RED One so getting that 120 fps isn't very easy for me haha.


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 23, 2012)

I certainly hope so. I would like to see a couple of stops better iso in RAW files if the new 12800 = current 3200 that would be awesome. I'm totally not interested in marketing jpg spin though
AF will be a godsend extra FPS not critical but fine. 
bigger better brighter veiwfinder would be sweet as going between 1D and 5D2 there is a massive difference
dual card is nice
and hoping for better build quality


----------



## kbmelb (Feb 23, 2012)

birdman said:


> I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious.



I'd be completely stoked! A 1DsIII with gapless pixels, better ISO and DR for $3k. I strongly believe this camera will not be $3500.

I am sure I'll be selling my 1DsII to offset the cost and will keep my 5DII as a back-up/2nd camera.


----------



## JR (Feb 23, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> I certainly hope so. I would like to see a couple of stops better iso in RAW files if the new 12800 = current 3200 that would be awesome. I'm totally not interested in marketing jpg spin though
> AF will be a godsend extra FPS not critical but fine.
> bigger better brighter veiwfinder would be sweet as going between 1D and 5D2 there is a massive difference
> dual card is nice
> and hoping for better build quality



+1. For me personally the ISO performance will be the selling factor. If there no ISO performance improvements (or very little) I will think twice before upgrading. For that matter I am still waiting anxiously to see how much improvement over the 5DmkII will the 1DX be at high ISO.

God forbid I dont want to go to the dark side, but Canon needs to give me better high ISO for what I shoot. I dont mind if they dont beet Nikon at high ISO, but at least give us a meaningful improvement on the current line-up!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Feb 23, 2012)

birdman said:


> I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious.
> 
> Maybe I will keep my 5dII, which I am content with, and invest in new glass to be released soon. This may be my best bet. I just hate to keep a depreciating asset when I could afford to sell and upgrade for about $1,000--the price I would get for my D7000 that I never shoot. AF is not important to me because I do 90% landscapes. But I will withhold judgement until the "Official" release. We could be in for a huge surprise.



Yes, if they don't give us some weird, crippled 61pt AF and if the fps are high. Although I certainly wouldn't have minded 30MP, definitely much better for wildlife and even for sports the reach helps too. Also nicer for landscape work. But 22MP, with 1DX AF, 7fps, improved low ISO DR, vastly improved video quality is quite nice (assuming all of that is the case, which is not at all certain).


----------



## alipaulphotography (Feb 23, 2012)

birdman said:


> I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious.
> 
> Maybe I will keep my 5dII, which I am content with, and invest in new glass to be released soon. This may be my best bet. I just hate to keep a depreciating asset when I could afford to sell and upgrade for about $1,000--the price I would get for my D7000 that I never shoot. AF is not important to me because I do 90% landscapes. But I will withhold judgement until the "Official" release. We could be in for a huge surprise.



Question - do you have a problem with the image quality of the current 5D?


----------



## psolberg (Feb 23, 2012)

It is perfect for me. I was hoping for a 1DX sensor in a 5D body, similar to what nikon did with the D700. But I guess canon isn't that generous.

4K video is a silly pipe dream. I can't even buy a 2K tv much less a 4K one. so I couldn't care less. video wise, I hope it has clean HDMI out like the nikon because all cameras will have it and the seven thousand dollar 1DX looks stupid missing such basic thing.

I'd like the see the QXD card as an option since I hate bulky CF cards.

I know the high ISO will be really good and the AF will be better than the children's point and shoot AF in the 5DII.


----------



## CowGummy (Feb 23, 2012)

alipaulphotography said:


> birdman said:
> 
> 
> > I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious.
> ...



A fair question I feel. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


----------



## adamfilip (Feb 23, 2012)

Since I had unreasonable requirements and standards NO it wont be good enough
this is what i want!

100MP
60 FPS
Clean ISOs from 25-1million
128 AF points all cross type, with EYE focus AF Selection
4k video at 120fps - raw
built in USB3, wifi, bluetooth, GPS, Compass, ethernet,thunderbolt, hdmi
swivel 4" OLED screen at full HD res
Full weather sealing to 10 meters underwater
and ofcourse a single SD card slot 

Im willing to pay up to $1500 for this


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 23, 2012)

We only have a few rumored specifications, its the whole package that will make me decide to upgrade from my MK II. A camera which is capable of being used at higher ISO in low light would be great for me. Better AF is also worth something. I do tend to crop quite a bit, and my 5D MK II seems to be hitting the sweet spot for that.

Like the 1DX, I want to see how it actually performs in RAW, not jpeg on the small lcd. I'll probably pre-order on the first day I can, I can always cancel or return it if its not up to expectations.


----------



## jrista (Feb 23, 2012)

psolberg said:


> It is perfect for me. I was hoping for a 1DX sensor in a 5D body, similar to what nikon did with the D700. But I guess canon isn't that generous.
> 
> 4K video is a silly pipe dream. I can't even buy a 2K tv much less a 4K one. so I couldn't care less. video wise, I hope it has clean HDMI out like the nikon because all cameras will have it and the seven thousand dollar 1DX looks stupid missing such basic thing.
> 
> ...



The 4k video is not so you can watch it at 4k...its so you have more resolution to work with during post. That gives you more freedom and control, as well as the benefit that downscaling can absorb undesirable artifacts and improve sharpness for final production. Another benefit of larger native resolution if you shoot your subjects a little smaller in the frame is the ability to apply post-process image stabilization, which can be a godsend for many low-budget film producers. 

Regardless of what native resolution you may film something at, it all ends up 1080p on BluRay or 1080i/720p on TV.


----------



## moreorless (Feb 23, 2012)

Well FF for me would be more "wants" than "needs" but generally I'd favour more MP over ISO/FPS/AF however I'd wait to see how the new 5D and D800 actually perform before choosing between them if I did upgrade. If superior low ISO noise performance on the Canon(say 400 and below) and the limations of glass(a 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 2.8's setup is most definately out of my price range) ment the difference in resolution was less than the figures suggest I might go for it instead.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Feb 23, 2012)

alipaulphotography said:


> Question - do you have a problem with the image quality of the current 5D?



too much banding, not enough low ISO DR (about 2.5 stops less usable DR than Nikon, at least)


(more MP would be nice, especially for wildlife)


----------



## Taemobig (Feb 23, 2012)

The 5D mark 2 was actually good enough for me. My only gripe was the AF system. I was ready to buy the new 5D right away if it was priced $3000. But at $3500, I'm having second thoughts.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 23, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> We only have a few rumored specifications, its the whole package that will make me decide to upgrade from my MK II.



Agreed. Based on this limited spec list, it's impossible to make a decision. My main interest in upgrading is improved AF. What is 61-pt AF? The xxxD and xxD lines both have 9-pt AF, but they're quite different from a performance standpoint. 

I'm upgrading, no question. I've got the budget for the 1D X. The question I need a real spec list to answer is, what will $3K be buying me ($6800, assuming $3500 + $300 for grip/battery). If it's just build quality and fps (with 4 fewer MP), that's less attractive but still possible. If it's also better AF and a significant improvement in ISO noise (RAW), that makes the 1D X more attractive.


----------



## RedEye (Feb 23, 2012)

At 22MP.... sorry, no go. Totally uninterested, and will likely go medium format.


----------



## RedEye (Feb 23, 2012)

don't smite me for being honest  I feel like I'm under an umbrella in a pissing contest.


----------



## RichardW (Feb 23, 2012)

Quite surprised (should be disappointed) with the 22-mp spec......is it really good enough to fight with 36mp D800?
If Canon insist the (comparatively) lower megapixel = better, I am expecting its High ISO performance is astonishing, at least reach the level of D3s.


----------



## ajfa (Feb 23, 2012)

Honestly, Canon will have to do a bit better than $3500.

Considering that the Nikon D800 is out with higher MP, better AF, better white balance (for those who don't like to spend 2 hours tuning each photo in RAW), and seemingly just-as-good video for only $3k, if I was going full-frame right now I'd ditch all my Canon lenses and go Nikon. Of course, who knows, maybe the D800 will turn out to be noisy, but I really doubt it.

I was hoping the 5d3 would cause 5d2 prices to tank. But if anything they've crept up in the last month, after Canon's xmas special ended (could be though that wedding season is approaching). If I have to spend at least $2k to get a 5d2, and $3.5k for a 5d3, I might as well go Nikon. 

$2700 5d3, and a $1800 price point for 5d2's, and I'll stick with canon.


----------



## skoobey (Feb 23, 2012)

It does not meet my needs at all. 

I'm a fashion photographer looking to upgrade, and at this price, 22mp is just waaay to low, especially as there is no mention of the sync speed.

At that price, switching to Nikon, is also a viable alternative.

But if I had that kind of money to spend on a body only I'd go for a Hasselblad or PhaseOne, which both have great upgradable modular systems.

I'll just stick with the 5dII. 8)


----------



## skoobey (Feb 23, 2012)

adamfilip said:


> Since I had unreasonable requirements and standards NO it wont be good enough
> this is what i want!
> 
> 100MP
> ...



That isn't far from the truth if you ad a 0 to those 1500$ making it 15000. Phase ONE is the word, but it is slooow


----------



## dbduchene (Feb 23, 2012)

At 22mp and 3,500 I will not think about it at all. I shoot landscape, Architecture and a little Model/Portrait. The Mark 2 will continue to be a very good camera for this and I cannot see spending 1700 to 2000 over what I could most likely sell a mark 2 for to get a mark 3 At less then 28MP I will wait it out to see what they do. I do not care about video at all. I carry a 7D as a back up and use it when I have sports the needs faster or better AF and that is only for shooting my son at water polo and swim meets. The 7D handles that very well. So it looks like after all of the time waiting I will not be spending money after all. I was so hoping that the rumors about a 5D X would be so true. I am sorry but I think that Canon is so missing the boat on this.


----------



## Randy (Feb 23, 2012)

Only if it's got eye-controlled autofocus


----------



## Arkarch (Feb 23, 2012)

No, the specs as stated are not ideal.

But I am trying to upgrade from a 7D so just about any FF is a step up. I might consider more the prospects of a 5D Mark II although I absolutely *Hate* the idea of buying an old model. But hey, sometimes the older models rock. Price will matter some. That little Nikon thought does enter my mind, but I just did pick up a 70-200 2.8 IS II - love it - and like the idea of upgrading to the 24-70 II.

My score -

Canon Lens Division - Heros. They seem to be working hard to get ahead of the resolution and IQ needs of better cameras.

Canon DSLR Division - Goats. They do not communicate and seem to be oblivious to the needs of several photo markets. I'll just say it - its an arrogance. And they have gotten into this obsession for video that I really do not want or need.

Damn these specs suck. Give me 28-30 MP at least.

But yeah, I'll probably buy it. Just not as happily as I could have been. Maybe wait for round 2?


----------



## bigblue1ca (Feb 23, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'm upgrading, no question. I've got the budget for the 1D X. The question I need a real spec list to answer is, what will $3K be buying me ($6800, assuming $3500 + $300 for grip/battery). If it's just build quality and fps (with 4 fewer MP), that's less attractive but still possible. If it's also better AF and a significant improvement in ISO noise (RAW), that makes the 1D X more attractive.



Neuro what we really need is for you to buy both cameras and do some of your much appreciated in-depth testing and report back with the results. This will allow those us who are also weighing the 1D X vs. 5DIII to make an informed decision. I'm sure you're planning a trip at some point where you might not need the 1D X, but you'll need something a little more than your 7D or 5DII, namely the 5DIII, you wouldn't want to get caught without the right tool for the job. ;D


----------



## Waterdonkey (Feb 23, 2012)

Minnesota Nice said:


> It easily fits my needs for photography, but I use my DSLR for video as well and I want something more than the standard 1080p @ 30/24 and 720p @ 60 fps. It's not exactly in my budget to buy a Phantom Flex or a RED One so getting that 120 fps isn't very easy for me haha.



+1! Look, _when_ I get this camera it will be a step up from my 7D and for Photos, I like the 7D. So as far as "photography needs"? Well, having this camera? I think I will feel as if I've arrived 8)
But the video (H.264) is a nightmare to work with in a world of fast turnaround. Jello effect, digital artifacts and the dreaded moire! These can be minimized and "fixed" in post but, who has the time?
Some of us, and I believe many more to come, are looking to this for more run and gun applications: TV Magazine style. Documentary. And if you all looked close, a lot of the footage shot at the Occupy events was shot on DSLRs and the footage looked great, much better then the NEWS cameras out there (on their 1/2", or well, 2/3" chip if they are lucky)... this brings me to audio, don't get me started on audio... and no a digital recorder will not do, too much time syncing audio and too dam many connections and switches to miss, I run two wireless lavs and a camera mic, and only two channels, ok two channels I can deal with. I'm hanging enough stuff on my camera rig as it is: wireless receiver, BeachTek, Camera light, follow focus, EVF......... In the News TV Magazine world video and audio should live together. I'm just saying'

So I understand if some of the purely *Photography* "photogs" out there are thinking "Dude its a still camera!!! leave it alone you video jockey!" I know, I know, its just that they put sutcha' nice big sensor in that box and the things you can do with the lenses.... come on you know its addictive and its just that I want more.


----------



## AprilForever (Feb 23, 2012)

No, not at all.

A FF is not going to give me the FPS I want unless it costs a WHOLE lot of money. 

A FF will not give me the reach I need unless it has like 36 MP.

If this is all they can do, this is pathetic. The D800 has it WAY beat.


----------



## dbduchene (Feb 23, 2012)

AprilForever said:


> No, not at all.
> 
> A FF is not going to give me the FPS I want unless it costs a WHOLE lot of money.
> 
> ...



Right now I have to agree. It almost feels like Canon is deciding that they just want to go after the sports action side of the game and hand Landscape and the likes over to Nikon. RIght now I am bummed that I have so much high end Canon Glass although like has been said the Lens side of the shop ROCKS over at Canon.


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 23, 2012)

I wouldnt worry too much, I am fairly certain canon are watching the D800 and if it is a hit then they will be countering with there own high mp camera
anyone would think its 2012 and the world was about to end...

oh hang on a minute!....


----------



## birtembuk (Feb 23, 2012)

Not to me, as this MKIII really looks like the epitome of video-camera that, incidentally can shoot nice stills. MKII has been a revelation to hordes of video-reporters/movie-makers and, imho, MKIII follows suit. I guess it will be big success there. For mere-mortal-photographers like me, at 3500 bucks it's another ball game. I luckily postponed purchase of big ticket lenses before embarking fully into FF digital. Guess I'll have to wait for next releases or seriously contemplate D800 asa reviews come out. Actually, with fast lenses, I'd be happy with clean 800ISO as long as I have hi-res.


----------



## dbduchene (Feb 23, 2012)

birtembuk said:


> Not to me, as this MKIII really looks like the epitome of video-camera that, incidentally can shoot nice stills. MKII has been a revelation to hordes of video-reporters/movie-makers and, imho, MKIII follows suit. I guess it will be big success there. For mere-mortal-photographers like me, at 3500 bucks it's another ball game. I luckily postponed purchase of big ticket lenses before embarking fully into FF digital. Guess I'll have to wait for next releases or seriously contemplate D800 asa reviews come out. Actually, with fast lenses, I'd be happy with clean 800ISO as long as I have hi-res.



That is why I was really hopping that the rumor about the split in the line would be true. My DSLRs are just for taking stills I have NEVER USED that video on the 7D. My DSLRs are for shooting the best stills that I can get. When I shoot video I use a nice little sony that is great at home videos. For me and many others that I know we have no concerns at all about video and do not really want to spend a dime on it.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 23, 2012)

I wont be upgrading my 5D2 to a 5D3 in the short time. The real question is when do I upgrade the 5D2 to a 1DX?


----------



## geniusofnati (Feb 23, 2012)

If those are the stats that the camera has,there would be no reason to get it,unless there arent any more 5D mkII


----------



## scottsdaleriots (Feb 23, 2012)

i wanted at least 25MP, i dont care about the high fps rate, but of course canon are catering it to the pro photogs. i would be content with 30AF points, 45 would be nice. 61 is a little too much for me and my needs. a much need significant drop in price for ANY new semi pro/pro camera would be great though!


----------



## Gav (Feb 23, 2012)

wow this is so funny.

I shoot with a Nikon D3s and D700. I decided to look at Canon today to see what was happening.

After waiting for ages to see an updated D700...something along the lines of slight increase in ISO and MP, they come up with the D800. Way too many MP for myself and 95% of the population. Still it looks like it will sell in droves.....not so much because of the high MP but it is an all round great camera with some great advancements.

Just take a look at nikonrumors.com. On that site they are moaning cos too many pixels, here you are moaning cos not enough!!! If the 5DIII has a reasonable increase in ISO which I am sure it must for this price then this would be a magnificent camera which the majority of Nikon users would prefer.

Is it the grass being greener or are we all a bunch of whiners


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 23, 2012)

scottsdaleriots said:


> i wanted at least 25MP, i dont care about the high fps rate, but of course canon are catering it to the pro photogs. i would be content with 30AF points, 45 would be nice. 61 is a little too much for me and my needs. a much need significant drop in price for ANY new semi pro/pro camera would be great though!



number of points is actually largely irrelevent other than AI servo
its how effective the points that are there really are. the 61 pt system is still un tested in the wild so
we still have to see how it performs
I am very happy with the older 45pt 1D system though its nice how you can change how many of those points you can actually select. problem with too many selectable points is it can take ages getting to the point you want to use instead of shooting. 
For me if I had 5 selectable points all as accurate as the 5dmk2 center point with 1 in the center and the other 4 at the rule of thirds intersections I would be extremely happy


----------



## Tijn (Feb 23, 2012)

The 5D III would very much satisfy my photography wants/needs! However I just upgraded to my second crop camera (60D) so it should be about a year or two at least before I upgrade to full-frame. 25.6k native ISO would be a great improvement from 6.4k (and possibly with two extensions rather than one), the AF would get its massive upgrade, viewfinder upgrade, MP increase, and it'd have the weathersealing I'd want on it.

Only thing is that I'll have to buy both the body _and_ a main zoom lens (i.e. 24-105L or 24-70L or so), which should put the cost pretty close to 4000eu, a year from now.


----------



## Blaze (Feb 23, 2012)

> Will the suggested 5d III specs satisfy your photograpy needs?



Too early to tell yet. I'm looking to upgrade to FF from a 7D and the 5DII just doesn't have the speed or AF I need for sports. The revealed specs for the 5D-next look promising but incomplete at the moment. If it's at least 6fps and gets a significant improvement in high-ISO capability and DR in addition to the rumored specs, then it sounds perfect for me. (1080p at 60fps and 720p at 120fps or better would be a lovely bonus.)


----------



## Curmudgeon (Feb 23, 2012)

When I pre-ordered, my 5d2, I told the salesman I hoped it would come in at 15-16 MP, which struck me as offering the best pixel density for 2008 technology. Given the relative strengths of the D700 and the 5d2, that seems like a reasonably astute shot in the dark for someone who isn't particularly tech-savvy. So. That's my credential for saying that something in the 20 MP range (18-22) strikes me as the sweet spot for current technology. Landscape photography is my first--but not my only--photographic passion, and I don't envy Nikon shooters their 36 megapixels. If the D700 demonstrated anything, it was that 12 very good MPs made a more adaptable camera than 21 good MPs, and the lower resolution was not a significant issue in many real-world shooting situations. (Even today, art directors who demand 30+ MP are indulging the fantasy that they work for a high end art publisher. There are no newspapers and almost no magazines that print to standards near that.)

MY personal photographic road map in retirement is to shoot enough local school events to provide the money and equipment to travel to the world's most exotic locations and become fabulously rich and famous for my calendar art. For that I'll need a camera that can handle the ISOs demanded in the dim, grim flourescent light of the middle school gyms and cafeterias where you find eighth grade basketball, fifth grade talent shows and Daddy-daughter dances. Outdoors, it won't have to have the frame rate of the cameras on the side lines at the Super Bowl or the Olympics, but it will need to be reasonably fast, with a high rate of AI servo hits for fast-moving sports like lacrosse, football and soccer. When I take it to the Tetons during the summer, it will have to have all the accurate color rendition, resolution and dynamic range you can squeeze out of ~20 MP. Oh yeah, and a 100% OVF with which to see it all.

In all seriousness, the speculative specs for the 5d3 suit my generalist purposes to a T.

That said, I haven't made up my mind yet about upgrading. I share one sentiment with several other contributors to this thread: what's currently competing for the dollars in my photographic budget is Canon's own upgraded lenses. I'll also have reservations if Canon prices the 5d3 $500 above the D800, and does so not because of demonstrably superior technology but in the belief that videographers locked in by the 5d2 will provide a profitable sales volume in spite of the price differential.

My decision about upgrading--like that of Neuroanatomist--will depend upon an evaluation of the full spec list--and probably a handful of reviews. (My options, however, will not include the 1DX, and I don't plan to pre-order as I did with the 5d2.)

There is one feature, however, that could make me take the plunge blindly. The search engine for this site shows surprisingly little on the subject, and I hope to open a thread on the matter in the next few days. Suppose Canon changed absolutely nothing else about the 5d2--including the much-maligned autofocus. If the 5d3 featured an honest (RAW) two-stop increase in dynamic range, I'd rob a bank yesterday to come up with the MSRP.

11


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Feb 23, 2012)

Yes, this is my ideal 5D3 spec list. The D700 to the 1DX's D3. Canon knows the two 5D2 differentiating features that helped it sell (more MP & HD video), are now "pedestrian" features and so they must make more effort this time around to justify the upgrade and higher MSRP.


----------



## D.Sim (Feb 23, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> I wouldnt worry too much, I am fairly certain canon are watching the D800 and if it is a hit then they will be countering with there own high mp camera
> anyone would think its 2012 and the world was about to end...
> 
> oh hang on a minute!....



I see what you did there... 

Gotta love aussie humour though ;D ;D ;D


----------



## pedro (Feb 23, 2012)

With these rumored specs, given the possibility of 1024 k it is a dream cam for me. Not being a pro, it will be "new" enough for ages...as my preferencies are low light without flash. My current 30D does quite well up to 1600 or 3200 exposed well to the right. So not this year but maybe next fall I'll return to FF having shot a Contax 139 Quartz back in the day (1982).


----------



## xROELOFx (Feb 23, 2012)

birdman said:


> I, for one, wish the 5d III had higher MP. I feel like the IQ will essentially be the same as the current 5dII that I own. ISO performance will be certainly better, and AF will kick serious but. However, it is a little curious to me that the MP as essentially the same. What I am saying, simply, is that the 1d3 and the 5dIII may be close to the SAME CAMERA!! Think about AF, frames per second, and MP. Then it becomes more curious.
> 
> Maybe I will keep my 5dII, which I am content with, and invest in new glass to be released soon. This may be my best bet. I just hate to keep a depreciating asset when I could afford to sell and upgrade for about $1,000--the price I would get for my D7000 that I never shoot. AF is not important to me because I do 90% landscapes. But I will withhold judgement until the "Official" release. We could be in for a huge surprise.


actually, to me this seems pretty logical. when the 1D and 1Ds where merged, the new 5D could end up to be the unofficial replacement of the 1Ds line. and like suggested in other topcis, perhaps canon will split the 5D line in the new camera mentioned and a new high MP monster.

but i guess we just have to wait a little longer. time will tell


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Feb 23, 2012)

I'll be perfectly happy with 22MP, and would welcome an improvement in the AF system & ISO performance. Dual card slots would be nice.

The price caused me a slight sticker shock. I hope the street price will be lower and/or that it's the price for a kit which includes a lens.


----------



## caruser (Feb 23, 2012)

Curmudgeon said:


> Suppose Canon changed absolutely nothing else about the 5d2--including the much-maligned autofocus. If the 5d3 featured an honest (RAW) two-stop increase in dynamic range, I'd rob a bank yesterday to come up with the MSRP.



Same here, although it would be more fun with at least some AF improvements!

However without BSI there's no chance whatsoevery for anything even remotely close to such an improvement...


----------



## STPhotos (Feb 23, 2012)

Ha. Canon's gonna pull an Apple on us. It's gonna be 38mp, 5fps , 45pt AF with better low light sensitivity, higher iso, dual CF card slots, weathersealing, crop mode, D1X video and a steal at $2800.

That's my wishful thinking at least.


----------



## nigelc (Feb 23, 2012)

RedEye said:


> At 22MP.... sorry, no go. Totally uninterested, and will likely go medium format.



+1


----------



## AndreeOnline (Feb 23, 2012)

Image quality is great with the 5D mkII, but newer models from other makers, even relatively inexpensive ones, are coming close or surpassing it.

The 5D mkIII will need to increase its dynamic range from the current 11.9 stops to about 14 to stay current.
It will need to improve ISO performance with about two true stops (i.e. ISO 6400 will be as good as current 1600)

That almost takes care of the stills side. Stills are already top notch with the mkII.

Now, I know that video is not everyone's game. But put aside personal needs on this one if you are not into it yourself.

Everyone knows that the mkII started everything video wise. The market is huge now, and video is, and will increasingly become, a really important factor for many photographers.

Video on the mkII was partly really great, but it is, to a large extent broken. It has moiré and aliasing that limit it severely. Fixing this will be huge. 

Stronger processing (CPU) performance might eliminate the need for line skipping and up the video resolution quite a bit. This combined with a mostly artifact free image will be important for the mkIII.

Perhaps they even throw the new ALL-I codec in there, if they don't feel it needs to be 1DX exclusive. But I do think that Canon knows the 5D mkIII needs to be at the very top video wise.

To all of this we can add wireless flash capability, modern AF-system and higer FPS.

When all of these bits fall into place it will be a really nice upgrade. Bring it on!!


----------



## daveswan (Feb 23, 2012)

ATM I use a 5D for stills and a 550D for video, and been looking at a GH2 to hack as a replacement for the 550D.

If Canon can get the video on the 5DIII (Or 5Dx whatever) up to scratch, ie true 1080p res, 12+ stops DR in video and a robust gradeable codec, then I'll gladly take 22 Mp (All I really need), sell my 5D and 550D and have one camera to do both, and with FF goodness for video as well as stills.

Just hope I can aford it when it comes out, the 1Dx (Never mind the C-300) is way out of my budget, the likely C-DSLR probably will be too, unless it comes in under £3000


----------



## nigelc (Feb 23, 2012)

nigelc said:


> RedEye said:
> 
> 
> > At 22MP.... sorry, no go. Totally uninterested, and will likely go medium format.
> ...



On second thoughts, if it comes even close to MFD level, D800E body is less than one third of the cost of Pentax 645D, the cheapest MFD on offer - lens costs similiar.

It just goes to show what a small proportion of sales the architectural/landscape/still life segment is. I think these specs will be fine for wedding/social/portrait/video.

My wish list was:

40MP
14 stop dynamic range and "no" noise from ISO25 to 800
effective weathersealing
effective focus confirmation for MF in LV and through OVF - focus peaking?
possibly micropism/split image focussing screen with gridlines
one press mirror lock-up 
AEB +/- 5 stops
not costing more than 5D2

Why are people so worked up about the size of files from D800? - 35mm scanned transparencies (at 4000dpi) are at least 60MB and my 6x7 scans can be over 300MB so this is not something new.


----------



## AndreeOnline (Feb 23, 2012)

Many are writing about how they crop a great deal, and that it's important.

Where does this come from?

Do you intentionally frame loosely/quickly, or is it more like:

"I wish I had that 300mm lens now that I haven't bought, but I'll crop my 85mm instead"

Sure, ability to crop is good sometimes, but it's not like it's a substitute for equipment or proper photography. and fewer, larger photo sites allow for better image quality in most cases.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 23, 2012)

AndreeOnline said:


> Many are writing about how they crop a great deal, and that it's important.
> 
> Where does this come from?
> 
> ...



Some of each. For birds, I shoot at 400mm on a 7D, equivalent to 640mm on FF. Going over 420mm while keeping AF is >$5K, cropping is cost-effective. 

Orientation change is another use. Crop a 36 MP landscape-oriented photo to portrait, you have a 16 MP file. Frame in portrait in the first place? Ok, maybe. But sometimes it's not your decision - with a fashion photo, the editor may want that change on the image she likes best. Or, from a recent experience of mine - portraits of two young kids together. It's a rare thing to catch both with a good expression, and common to get a great expression on one while the other has a finger up the nose. Cropping (and Photoshop to remove part of the other one's hand) can salvage shots like that.


----------



## AprilForever (Feb 23, 2012)

AndreeOnline said:


> Many are writing about how they crop a great deal, and that it's important.
> 
> Where does this come from?
> 
> ...



It's more like: I wish I had an 800 5.6, but since all I can afford is a 300 2.8 + 2x TC, I may have to crop sometimes.


----------



## KeithR (Feb 23, 2012)

AndreeOnline said:


> Where does this come from?



Ever heard of bird photography? 

Every bird 'tog I know - including many professionals - has to crop: there's no such thing as a bird photographer who is never focal-length limited.

Add to that the fact that we have no control over our subject matter, and frequently need to crop for compositional reasons.



> fewer, larger photo sites allow for better image quality in most cases.



Simply not true.


----------



## RedEye (Feb 23, 2012)

nigelc said:


> nigelc said:
> 
> 
> > RedEye said:
> ...



I'm on board with your spec list. As per the file size I have no idea, I have a i7 970 chip in my computer and I'm not sure if it will notice the difference in file size. From a professional side of things, I'm thinking the new server hardware and a $39 copy of Microsoft home server will surprise people with its capacities for mass storage. For apple people, of which I'm included, I can understand the gripe, but on the other hand, I can't wait to see it on my apple display.


----------



## Bobster (Feb 23, 2012)

Yes


----------



## Picsfor (Feb 23, 2012)

in a word, yes.

The reasons are as follows:

My only gripes with the 5D2 are its AF and lack of dual card slots.

These specs fix both of those concerns.

My other 'gripe' was only discovered wen trying out the 1DX, and that is the lack of joystick duplication for when using the camera in portrait mode. Didn't miss what you hadn't had so to speak. But again, this looks like it might be fixed with the new BG.

I've lost a card at the end of a shoot, and thankfully it was only a tfp shoot - and i was lucky enough to recover some images via software. So dual card slotg is essential in my mind.

Also, i'm not a centre point focus person, so having usable outside AF points become a necessity to me.


----------



## marekjoz (Feb 23, 2012)

No. Human's nature makes us never satisfied enough.


----------



## RedEye (Feb 23, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> No. Human's nature makes us never satisfied enough.



Well said. When I got a t2i as an upgrate from a very very old rebel, I ran around telling everyone how sharp and clear it was, circa 2010 A.D. 

Took a trip to HI and realized how not so clear the landscapes were, so I purchased a 135L lens, and then realized how not so dynamica and not so clear the camera has somehow become over 15 months... and then I began checking this site in April 2011 once a week or so. By october I was hitting the site once a day, and now once an hour. I'm pretty sure that I'm either going to CAA (Canon Abusers Anom...) or simply passing out by the end of the week! 

And then comes Ash Wednesday, Lent, and somehow an amazing ability to slow everything down and recompose why I like photos.... beauty, story telling, freezing a once-in-history spot for maybe no purpose other than the camera focus causes my own human person to re-focus on the sorroundings, environment, people - to see the lighting, shadows, lines. 

After this new camera comes out, I'm going to become a painter. Yes, paint. We'll see how well that goes without product releases


----------



## Neeneko (Feb 23, 2012)

Not really. I don't need high FPS, I don't need autofocus, I don't need video, and while a dual CF might be useful, this 'we can take both media types' just wastes room.

I think the main thing these specs will do for me is hopefully flood the used market with lower cost bodies that are closer to what I need ^_^ though a FF MP monster would have been nice.


----------



## silat shooters (Feb 23, 2012)

RedEye said:


> marekjoz said:
> 
> 
> > No. Human's nature makes us never satisfied enough.
> ...



Fun read! Thanks for the laughs! I think the new specs would clearly fill my needs especially if the ISO 6400 is noticeably cleaner. That and the improved focusing would be enough. But as mentioned, human nature is hard to fight and now knowing that there is a camera out there for less money with higher spec would have me pausing on hitting "Add to Cart" on the this new 'suggested 5D III spec body'.


----------



## sweetcancer (Feb 23, 2012)

I am very happy with the specs MP and af wise. 22mp is more than enough, and 61 af points is also more than enough. I do hope the af points to be spred out a little more though. Mostly i'm conserned about DR performance. I need at least 13 stops of dynamic range. If that requirement is not met, i see no point to upgrade from my trusty 5d mark II.


----------



## kubelik (Feb 23, 2012)

the rumored specs are everything I hoped for in a 5D Mark II successor. I could shoot this camera for a very, very long time, and not worry at all about what comes after.


----------



## kennykodak (Feb 23, 2012)

i did a group shot of executives (125) looking on them standing on a deco staircase. i shot a few with a Hasselblad 39MP and some with a Canon 5D2. the client selected the 5D2 image for distribution. the 22MP Canon was tight and 125 smiling faces were tack. i have a 1Dx on order and will most likely update my 5D2 with the 5d?. and those of you considering medium format, consider converting raw compressed images into raw images to convert again to a usable format. fast computer and a lot of storage...


----------



## bdeutsch (Feb 23, 2012)

kubelik said:


> I could shoot this camera for a very, very long time, and not worry at all about what comes after.


If only that were true...if you're any of the rest of us who religiously think about the rumor, you'll be worried about what comes after right away. That being said, I'm still shooting with my trusty 5d which I got just as soon after its release as I could.


Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos  | NY Wedding Photos


----------



## jm345 (Feb 23, 2012)

The key for me to replace my 5DII will be if the 5DIII has extended the dynamic range - usable higher ISOs. I already have an acceptable AF system and FPS, when I need it, with my 7D.


----------



## frisk (Feb 23, 2012)

I intended to upgrade from my 40D this year. The 7D was not the right upgrade for me - I wanted a FF camera. The 5D2 was not quite right for me either - I was not too impressed with the AF system, and it was a bit too slow.

So, yes, if the specs are accurate, it is just what I was looking for ...and if the high-ISO performance is improved beyond what the 5D2 offered, that will will be a significant extra bonus for me.

In my case, the answer to the question is a very definite 'yes'.


----------



## RobS (Feb 23, 2012)

with this specs coming, canon has no body at all for my needs. So i will saving some month for MF or switch to nikon. 
There is no camera from canon at this date which will fit for studio phtographers. Especially when Nikon has a D800. 
Sure 22MP are enough but for composing there is no space to crop, and with MP over 30 there is plenty space to crop and even size down to a needed size to get the needed IQ

so i'm pretty sure i will leave the canon camp


----------



## marekjoz (Feb 23, 2012)

RobS said:


> with this specs coming, canon has no body at all for my needs. So i will saving some month for MF or switch to nikon.
> There is no camera from canon at this date which will fit for studio phtographers. Especially when Nikon has a D800.
> Sure 22MP are enough but for composing there is no space to crop, and with MP over 30 there is plenty space to crop and even size down to a needed size to get the needed IQ
> 
> so i'm pretty sure i will leave the canon camp



What will you be selling?


----------



## jrista (Feb 23, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> No. Human's nature makes us never satisfied enough.



I would call it Human Choice, rather than nature, that makes us never satisfied enough. You can always choose to be satisfied with what you have, particularly these days when just about everything is way beyond good enough for the vast majority of situations. I "want" a 5D III, but I AM satisfied with my 7D...more than that, as it offers me things the 5D, being full frame, cannot. Its not the best from an IQ standpoint, but it is acceptable. Its not the fastest from a framerate standpoint, but it is acceptable. Its not the best from a features standpoint, but it is acceptable. 

Being satisfied is about choosing. Wanting is about human nature. We'll always WANT more, but we can concurrently be SATISFIED about what we have now. I would also argue that if we ARE satisfied with what we have, we'll enjoy all the more what we have the gear for in the first place: our photography. ;-)


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Feb 23, 2012)

Do you think the dual CF card slots will mean a better(higher bit rate) video codec?


----------



## marekjoz (Feb 23, 2012)

jrista said:


> marekjoz said:
> 
> 
> > No. Human's nature makes us never satisfied enough.
> ...



You gave me great arguing opportunity:
1. Am I satisfied with my photography skills? Actually No, but I can choose to BE 
2. Am I satisfied with my photos? Hmm Yes, I choose YES 
3. Do I want them to be better? No - what for if I've already chosen them to be great 
Just joking... (but being satisfied about my choice I know I'm right again  )


----------



## pedro (Feb 23, 2012)

kubelik said:


> the rumored specs are everything I hoped for in a 5D Mark II successor. I could shoot this camera for a very, very long time, and not worry at all about what comes after.



same with me. I will upgrade back to FF. Had a Contax back in the film days. Shooting a 30D for about 5 years as an amateur there will be plenty of camera to explore and to work at my learning curve with for a decade I guess... 8)


----------



## distant.star (Feb 23, 2012)

I'm impressed you could shoot 125 faces and not have at least one blinking the eyes. Congratulations! Sounds like a really tough shot.




kennykodak said:


> i did a group shot of executives (125) looking on them standing on a deco staircase. i shot a few with a Hasselblad 39MP and some with a Canon 5D2. the client selected the 5D2 image for distribution. the 22MP Canon was tight and 125 smiling faces were tack. i have a 1Dx on order and will most likely update my 5D2 with the 5d?. and those of you considering medium format, consider converting raw compressed images into raw images to convert again to a usable format. fast computer and a lot of storage...


----------



## BL (Feb 23, 2012)

kubelik said:


> the rumored specs are everything I hoped for in a 5D Mark II successor. I could shoot this camera for a very, very long time, and not worry at all about what comes after.



+2

I've been shooting with a 5D classic since 2005 and am still amazed at what can be produced given the age of the technology. My only limitation with the classic is that AI servo is essentially useless when I've tried to photograph moving subjects.

With the rumored/confirmed AF upgrade, this feature alone makes it upgrade worthy. I see no reason to retire the veteran classic however - the 5D classic just *works* for me.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Feb 23, 2012)

While I love to shoot landscapes, cityscapes, HDr, etc, etc, etc ---- More of my income comes from events, and hopefully soon, weddings. So to that end, 22 MP, high ISO and good quality, yeah, that sells me. If I was making enough on art sales to justify an art only camera, then higher MP with less options for high ISO would be awesome, but I'd rather have a camera that can produce good images for art, while also being versatile enough in low light to get the "wow" shots.

side bar note, I love all the cross comments from nikon users over here, who knows, maybe all the we want the MP people will jump ship to nikon, while all the we want high ISO performance folk will jump over to canon ---the more of this the merrier - I'll be glad to buy all this used equipment when it hits the market!


----------



## 7enderbender (Feb 23, 2012)

If this is really what will materialize in a few days then I wouldn't feel an immediate urge to buy a second 5DII right now. Looks like this may be a logical and useful successor that one day, when my 5DII stops working or when I have a need for second DSLR body I'd be comfortable to buy/add. Other than that I don't see anything in the specs where I feel like I have to run out and spend additional money. I'm really more curious about the 40mm lens and the 590 flash to be honest.


----------



## distant.star (Feb 23, 2012)

While most of these projected "specs" will satisfy my photography needs, the most glaring one surely does not. I'm not sure I have either $3500 for a camera body or the NEED for a $3500 body. Since it's all speculation, I'll remain open to the facts as they are revealed.

For me, this may definitively answer that question about why some of us don't want video in our still cameras. I'd suggest Canon sold boatloads of the 5D2 based on video performance alone (probably to their surprise), and some buyers (commercial) probably bought them in bundles. So, Canon marketing satans decided if they improved upon that video performance, they could increase the price dramatically and sell even bigger boatloads to the video crowd. So, adding video to my still camera now adds a $1000 premium for something I don't need or want. Yet I'm also resigned to the fact that still photography is going the way of, as one prior poster suggested, painting. 

Anyway, I've been waiting a long time for the facts; hopefully the wait is nearly over.

Oh, and as an aside, I'm not convinced Canon sees Nikon as quite as big an influence on their products as many here appear to think they do. Competition is always a factor, sure, but Canon has differentiated themselves just enough to make some competitors less pesky. They may even focus more on Sony as competition at this point. Just a thought -- I have lots of them!


----------



## psolberg (Feb 23, 2012)

> So, adding video to my still camera now adds a $1000 premium for something I don't need or want.



the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point. I would be surprise if the video specs on this camera aren't a carbon copy of the 1DX. These cameras are returning to focus on stills and the video guys will go their own way.


----------



## Neeneko (Feb 23, 2012)

psolberg said:


> the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point. I would be surprise if the video specs on this camera aren't a carbon copy of the 1DX. These cameras are returning to focus on stills and the video guys will go their own way.



Sadly I suspect Canon marketing has not caught on to this yet. Right now they seem to have a 'video in everything' requirement, as does Nikon. The only companies that are not investing in video are the MF camera makers since their customers are not even vaguely interested, thus the increased R&D/manufacturing costs are not worth it.

I would not be surpised if, in another generation, Canon starts making still cameras again after the 'multimedia' thing looses steam and people go back to dedicated devices on the medium end.


----------



## Actionpix (Feb 23, 2012)

Like with the previous 5D and 5D II I am absolutely not impressed. Looking at the years between the models I think the improvement is not very convincing. (Note! This is only my opinion and no more.) I, for myself, still very much would like a 45MP camera (FF) with ISO starting at 25 or eventually 50. For my action shots I very often just have to much light to really show the action. I also would like more detail in the name of driver or pilot on the fuselage, as this is what matters to them. Having lenses of $10.000 and no camera to let these lenses excel is frustrating. I do not care for video or high iso. Just give me more pixels and FF for shallower DoF.


----------



## psolberg (Feb 23, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point. I would be surprise if the video specs on this camera aren't a carbon copy of the 1DX. These cameras are returning to focus on stills and the video guys will go their own way.
> ...



I hope so. I'm sure video will remain built in forever but hopefuly they'll focus on making better still images. We're still shooting with sync speed limiting physical shutters, prisms, darn noisy slapping mirrors, and same old point based AF. And all I hear is 4K, 4K, 4K. Jez, I haven't even seen a freaking 4K tv in my life or a tv channel that has that. Meanwhile I have to put up with 250ms sync speed because nobody has cared to get rid of the noisy shutter. All the RD is video video.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 23, 2012)

Nope.

* Better AF and faster fps are welcome improvements, but it doesn't have the MP to make up for the loss of crop factor which is important for my action shots. So it can't help there.

* For landscapes it doesn't have any more resolution than the current 5D2. If I can't tell the difference in 24" landscape prints between the current 5D2 and my 7D, then why would I be able to tell with a 5D3? Upgrading my crop UWA glass to FF glass would be a substantial investment and would only be worth it if I can get significantly more resolution for larger, more detailed landscape prints.

I don't begin to understand Canon's reasoning here. It's like they positioned the 5D3 closer to the 1Dx and further away from the landscape / studio / wedding camera it's supposed to be. They're going to cannibalize their own 1Dx sales on one end, while Nikon eats into their sales on the other with the D800. And I have to wonder: how many 5D2 users will consider upgrading? 5D2 AF is a sore spot, but for many the center point works good enough to get the job done. Are they really going to drop $3k for an AF update?

I don't have money burning a whole in my pocket right now, so I'll sit tight with my 7D for the moment. But if Canon doesn't have an answer for the D800 this year, there's a good chance I will be adding Nikon to my lineup.

Canon's crop bodies all look good against the competition right now. But Canon seems to be falling behind in FF even though they were the first ones there.


----------



## kenraw (Feb 23, 2012)

Before the D800 was announced everyone want no more than 18mp in the 5dIII as this was the " sweet spot "
Now all of a sudden 22mp isn't good enough????? What are you shooting and how big do you want to print?
If you people now need huge mp fot their work how were they managing with a measley 21mp?

I think it's simple. If all you are interested in is 36mp buy a Nikon D800 who cares its only as camera just get one. 

For me 22mp is easlily enough. I currently use 7D's for weddings and most peole would be surprised how well the images print at 24" x 36" at iso 1600. Actually printing gives a totally differnent result than looking at your images at 100% on your monitor that cant display the true resolution.

The reason I will be upgrading immediately to the 5dmk3 is for better noise so I can shoot at 6400 or maybe above and to give me that extra shallow DOF. If it was 36mp I don't think I'd be too happy with 75mb raw files.
If you run the D800's sample images through plugins in CS5 there is a big difference in the time it takes to process them so god only knows what it will be like handling 2000 raw images from a wedding. My pc would go into meltdown and I've got a high spec machine. 
I think canon are going to announce a high mp camera anyway aswell so if u need to stick with your glass just hold out a bit a longer, the 5d2 and 7d are still awesome cameras anyway.

The new one one in my opinion will be the 5dx and the high mp one could have a different model numer altogether.

And one last thing. Canon hasn't actually announced the spec's or price anyway so It could still shatter all our dreams :'(


----------



## Radiating (Feb 23, 2012)

As others have said, it doesn't make sense to bring this highly anticipated camera to market without major improvments.

I think the most dramatic improvement we'll see is in noise. The 5D Mark II had some of the worst quantum efficiency (portion of photons collected) possible in a camera, it only collects 25% of the photons that strike the sensor. That number is so low that it is only equaled by medium format cameras, or some of the very very early DSLR's which only had 2-6 megapixels. Canon litelrally put one of the least advanced sensors they could make in the 5D and 5D II. It's stone age technology of the cheapest caliber. What is very possible and what I am hoping is that Canon bumps the camera to at least the "average" light gathering in it's range, if not making it the king of low noise. 

At the least I'm speculating a 1 stop increase in light gathering, which is an epic difference, no more low iso noise and nikon quality dynamic range, pro grade AF and a major bump in continuous RAW shooting as well as major improvements in video. This would pretty much make it the go-to camera for practically anything. THE killer app - a 22 mp D3s in other words. 


I'm also speculating that Canon will then release another 5D like camera with 30-50 megapixels which will have a 'soviet era' sensor design.

If you take a 5D III with the specs I outlined, a 5DX with extreme resolution but poor performance otherwise and the 1DX you have the best bodies out there in this segment. 

If the 5D III is anything like I'm speculating it will be perfect for most photographer's needs including my own.


----------



## ghstark (Feb 23, 2012)

As a Pro Wedding & Portrait Photographer i think 22mp is ok as long as it has twin card slots(for me this is the most important) and improved AF.Most of us want great low light quality and i can't see the d800 being as good as a 22mp 5d mk3 in low light.


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 23, 2012)

I am sure that whatever specs would leak or be announced, there will be many who are dissatisfied. Many of you and I are focusing on specs, and we get worked up about them. However, I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. I have the Canon Lens book, and looking at some of the classic old pictures taken there one is struck that these photographers were stuck with way worse equipment than we have at our disposal today. I believe that if these specs does not satisfy your needs, you should invest in a Leica or Hasselblad. On the other hand, few people are skilled enough as photographers to outgrow the current Canon high end cameras.

Just a humble thought...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 23, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.



A simple rangefinder camera and a 50mm lens were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. Glass plates in a large, cumbersome view camera were more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us. 

Having said that, I like tools that make what I do easier and more enjoyable.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Feb 23, 2012)

psolberg said:


> the market is saturated with video dslrs. they know this. the phenomenon of the 5DII will not repeat itself. high end video is moving away to the big boys like sony, red, canon cinema, and others where the gear is designed for video that isn't possible at the 5D line price point.



This argument would have sounded reasonable in 2007, not 2012. The 5DII already proved that top of the line IQ can be delivered for $3K back in '08. There is absolutely no *technical* reason that suggests that they aren't able to do so now as well. 

Secondly, the idea that video is moving to the "big boys" is misleading. The one that are moving to the big (and expensive) boys are the ones that made a name for themselves in recent years, mostly with 5DIIs and now can afford the luxuries that dedicated video cameras offer. But as they once were starting out without the possibility to drop 10k-20k on a camera rig, there are new filmmakers that cannot do that now. If Canon will "abandon" them in favor of the more grossing Cinema line, there are other manufacturers that will take their place and that will hurt Canon in the long run. At this point it seems that Panasonic is but a year or two away from unleashing a killer product which could severely hurt the Canon if they are not paying attention.


----------



## Quasimodo (Feb 23, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > I believe (having a 5D mkII myself and having my eyes fixed on a 1DX) that the cameras that Canon have now and are about to be launched are more than sufficient to take stellar shots that will outlive all of us.
> ...


----------



## Neeneko (Feb 23, 2012)

psolberg said:


> I hope so. I'm sure video will remain built in forever but hopefuly they'll focus on making better still images. We're still shooting with sync speed limiting physical shutters, prisms, darn noisy slapping mirrors, and same old point based AF. And all I hear is 4K, 4K, 4K. Jez, I haven't even seen a freaking 4K tv in my life or a tv channel that has that. Meanwhile I have to put up with 250ms sync speed because nobody has cared to get rid of the noisy shutter. All the RD is video video.



Actually, I saw someone doing a DIY camera project that used a re-purposed LCD screen as a shutter. Their idea was to get exotic aperture shapes (kinda like lensbaby) but I could easily see a similar method being used to get really fast shutter speeds. It is a pity innovation in cameras really seems to have moved off-shore.


----------



## smirkypants (Feb 23, 2012)

As a full-frame camera it's great and I'm actually thrilled with the specs and will likely buy one. One really gets accustomed to a great AF system and whenever I used a 5D2 I always became frustrated by how 20th century it seemed. I do some event photography but it just couldn't keep up with the way I learned to love framing and shooting. 

Yes it will fill my FF desires but my money-maker is the crop. Still waiting for that one. If they could they just drop a 22MP APS-H in this one, I'd buy two and take them both home to meet mommy.


----------



## dadgummit (Feb 23, 2012)

not likely but possible 

1. I have a 7d now and don't really need all 19 of the AF points so 61 seems silly (My opinion only) unless you are trying to track a dragon fly in flight or something. I would be fine with 9 or 19 af points as long as they are more sensitive (less hunting in dark/ low contrast situations) and f8 would be nice but that is probably reserved for 1D bodies only. My opinion on this is we are paying for an expensive af system I would never use.

2. Stepping from 7d to full frame it would be nice to at least be able to do a 1.6X crop and still end up with 18mp which means the camera would need to be about 29mp. 22MP would be good If and only IF the high ISO noise and DR are FAR ahead of the already excellent 5d II. In my eyes to justify $3500 this camera would have to have the same noise at ISO 3200 or 6400 as the 7D has at ISO 100 or 200.

3. FPS, I have used the 7d's 8 FPS like twice and it was kind of cool (kid sliding down a slide) but if the new camera has 6.9, 6 or even 4 that would be fine too as long as the AF keeps up. 

4. Dual card slots... Good for a wedding photog but useless otherwise. If I did want dual slots I would not be excited over a second SD slot though I would want a second CF. 

5. 100% Full Frame Viewfinder is EXCELLENT!! a big plus in my eyes as long as the user can change out the focus screen if they want.

6. 3.2" LCD. Bigger is better but .2" is not much different.


So in my eyes the 100% viewfinder is a plus but my purchase decision COMPLETELY relies on the utter speculation that this camera will be many stops better in High ISO noise than the 5D2 for it to justify the huge price jump.


----------



## jalbfb (Feb 23, 2012)

Answer: Yes


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 23, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> BTW: Neuro I have a question for you, if you have time, but this thread is not the right one.. It's about fluorite.



I sent you a PM (Messages tab along the top).


----------



## yunusoglu (Feb 23, 2012)

The CR3 confirmed specs are unfortunately not enough for me to upgrade from 5D Mark II...

I'm sure the new 5 series camera will be great and if I didn't own Mark IIs, I wouldn't hesitate on the purchase but, I ask myself; what will I get in return for the $3500?

+1MP? Not worth the trouble...
Super-duper ISO performance? Don't care under studio lighting...
7fps frame rate? Irrelevant...
+0.2" LCD? No use for me...
61 points AF? I'll still be using center AF point if it had 661 AF points.

That would be $3500 spent for everything I don't need so I definitely see no point in upgrading.

Do I even consider switching to Nikon for the D800? No, not at all. I've invested too much in Canon gear to switch now. Plus, today D800 appears to look like what I need but what happens tomorrow, you never know...

I don't know if it's wishful thinking but somehow I believe that Canon will also announce a camera aiming at studio/landscape photographers, weighing heavier on the megapixels rather than low light capability and speed.


----------



## zim (Feb 23, 2012)

Need to see the full specs and raw comparisons but potentially absolutely yes. Happy to let the street price settle and see what if anything else is released this year though so no rush decision from me.


----------



## iaind (Feb 23, 2012)

zim said:


> Need to see the full specs and raw comparisons but potentially absolutely yes. Happy to let the street price settle and see what if anything else is released this year though so no rush decision from me.



Probably wont be available until Photokina so a few more months to save up. By then hopefully the photojournalists will have found all the potential faults in the 1DX and the first of many firmware updates will have been released. Why pay for the privelidge to be a guinea pig.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 23, 2012)

dadgummit said:


> not likely but possible
> 
> 1. I have a 7d now and don't really need all 19 of the AF points so 61 seems silly (My opinion only) unless you are trying to track a dragon fly in flight or something. I would be fine with 9 or 19 af points as long as they are more sensitive (less hunting in dark/ low contrast situations) and f8 would be nice but that is probably reserved for 1D bodies only. My opinion on this is we are paying for an expensive af system I would never use.
> 
> ...




1. When the AF point is used for metering then the extra points are useful for correct exposure .

2. The 5DII noise dramaticaly increases after iso 3200. So a clean iso 6400 would seem to be at least a one stop improvement. Until tested we cant really tell - though the 1d4 was acceptable with care to 12800, so I would hope it matches that.

3. Why wouldn;t the AF keep up?

4. fair enough - could be a space issue - although more likele because the 2 card unit was already being produced for the series 1 bodies. It works fine.

5. and 6 - standard improvements


----------



## dadgummit (Feb 23, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> 1. When the AF point is used for metering then the extra points are useful for correct exposure .
> 
> 2. The 5DII noise dramaticaly increases after iso 3200. So a clean iso 6400 would seem to be at least a one stop improvement. Until tested we cant really tell - though the 1d4 was acceptable with care to 12800, so I would hope it matches that.
> 
> 3. Why wouldn;t the AF keep up?



makes sense. I thought the metering for exposure and the AF sensors were totally different. My 7d has 19 AF sensors and 63-zone dual-layer metering. But it would make sense to have the AF sensors report distance too the camera because that would help with exposure. 

I was only mentioning the stuff in "2" to say that if they did not improve the MP count I am hoping they dramatically improved the 22 mp sensor's capabilites over the older 21mp sensor.


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 23, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> Yes it will fill my FF desires but my money-maker is the crop. Still waiting for that one. If they could they just drop a 22MP APS-H in this one, I'd buy two and take them both home to meet mommy.


I'd be right behind you in the que for that bad boy


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 23, 2012)

dadgummit said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > 1. When the AF point is used for metering then the extra points are useful for correct exposure .
> ...




It is an option for series 1 bodies to link the AF point to metering - so what you focus on is what is metered. I suspect that most 5D2 users AF on the centre point which is the metering point and why the 5D2 has the reputation for good metering 8) 8) 8)

Series 1 bodies also have the capability of individually selecting up to 8 af points for metering - very usefull for weddings, groups and landscapes. If the 5DIII AF is based on the 1DX AF then hopefully these features will come too.

I would see 1 stop improvement as very significant to be good at iso 12800 would be excellent


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 23, 2012)

ghstark said:


> Most of us want great low light quality and i can't see the d800 being as good as a 22mp 5d mk3 in low light.



It's a myth that lower pixel density = superior noise for the total image. Total image noise is driven by total sensor surface area and technology level until you reach the pixel densities we see in P&S sensors. Unless Canon has made a leap beyond the technology available to Nikon, I honestly expect the D800 to match the 5D3 in high ISO noise.

Pixel size is related to DR because smaller pixels saturate faster. But I doubt this is an issue with either. If Canon's now "old" 18 MP crop sensor can pull 10-11 stops, a D800 can probably yield 12 or more. That's getting into color portrait film territory.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 23, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> smirkypants said:
> 
> 
> > Yes it will fill my FF desires but my money-maker is the crop. Still waiting for that one. If they could they just drop a 22MP APS-H in this one, I'd buy two and take them both home to meet mommy.
> ...



Hopefully the 'other' 5DII will be a 40mp APS-H based on the 120mp sensor they showed in 2010 ;D ;D 8) 8)


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 23, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> dadgummit said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Yep I only use spot metering, i meter for the part of the scene i want as the control point set my exposure manually then focus and shoot (with the 5d focus recompose then shoot) this is another reason i like back button focus as it seperates the focus and metering actions


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 23, 2012)

dtaylor said:


> ghstark said:
> 
> 
> > Most of us want great low light quality and i can't see the d800 being as good as a 22mp 5d mk3 in low light.
> ...



Canon's old 18mp crop sensor is hardly an advert for low noise at high iso. The lower density APS-H and FF even older technologies still win hands down over the crop.


----------



## Wrathwilde (Feb 24, 2012)

RedEye said:


> After this new camera comes out, I'm going to become a painter. Yes, paint.



Now you face your next conundrum, what color are you going to paint your living room. 


The new 5D3/X sounds perfect for me if...

Canon's auto White Balance is significantly improved. 

The Autofocus results in significantly more usable pics when shooting action at max fps. 

Raw images at ISO 3200 are clean with excellent DR

If the 1DX is significantly better than the 5D3/X in ISO and DR then I'll pony up for the 1DX.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 24, 2012)

Wrathwilde said:


> RedEye said:
> 
> 
> > After this new camera comes out, I'm going to become a painter. Yes, paint.
> ...



+1 Now that is a realistic set of expections

Personally I am not worried about AWB as I sort that in pp


----------



## Minnesota Nice (Feb 24, 2012)

Waterdonkey said:


> Minnesota Nice said:
> 
> 
> > It easily fits my needs for photography, but I use my DSLR for video as well and I want something more than the standard 1080p @ 30/24 and 720p @ 60 fps. It's not exactly in my budget to buy a Phantom Flex or a RED One so getting that 120 fps isn't very easy for me haha.
> ...



I know I can understand why people who shoot NO VIDEO at all would really hate paying the premium for the video function if they wont use it.

All of the other kids and guys that film snowboarding where I'm from say "Why are you filming with that? Why didn't you just buy a video camera?" and I can see that! But in all fairness they don't understand how much nicer the IQ is and with that bigger sensor it just looks so much better. Of course they aren't exactly filming with state of the art super expensive camcorders but it's at least a step up from that. It's just not in my budget to get something like a RED or a Phantom Flex.


----------



## randplaty (Feb 24, 2012)

Wow, I had no idea people actually cared about megapixels. Probably all of the photographers who love megapixels switched to Canon and all who hated switched to Nikon and now the companies are flip flopping.

As a wedding photographer, I can tell you that his camera is basically perfect. I shoot sRAW right now so I don't care at all for megapixels. 10 megapixels are plenty. I want low noise at high ISO. I want good AF in low light situations. Sounds like the 5DIII is going to deliver in those departments. Perfect.


----------



## KeithR (Feb 24, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Canon's old 18mp crop sensor is hardly an advert for low noise at high iso. The lower density APS-H and FF even older technologies still win hands down over the crop.



Brian, that's simply, _demonstrably_ not true.

The 7D is _easily_ as clean as the 1D Mk III at the image level (I side-by-side tested the Mk III and the 7D _to death_ before _choosing_ the 7D over the Mk III), and _much, much_ better than earlier APS-H bodies.

It's better than the 5D too: and in my experience easily as good as the 5D Mk II/1DS Mk III. And it's certainly far better than the 1Ds Mk II and earlier FF 1D bodies.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 24, 2012)

KeithR said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's old 18mp crop sensor is hardly an advert for low noise at high iso. The lower density APS-H and FF even older technologies still win hands down over the crop.
> ...


By the earlier technologies I was referring to the 1d4 and 5d2

I too compared the 7D with these bodies and at anything over iso 1600 the 7D fell away. Having heard that the 7D was 'top high iso' I was mighty disappointed to find they weren't so I took a hit and sold them.


----------



## chengpenguin (Feb 24, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> By the earlier technologies I was referring to the 1d4 and 5d2
> 
> I too compared the 7D with these bodies and at anything over iso 1600 the 7D fell away. Having heard that the 7D was 'top high iso' I was mighty disappointed to find they weren't so I took a hit and sold them.



Indeed. I heard about the 7D and 1D4 being low light champs and I tried them both for a week. None of them beats the 5D2 natively.


----------



## Richard Gear (Feb 24, 2012)

22mp is an enormous letdown to me. Especially since the D800 is so much higher in this field.

I really hope this is just a false rumor.

I've been working as a graphic designer for more then 10 years now and sometimes shoot photos myself for work, plus work constantly with supplied photos from shoots, stock, etc etc.

I NEED MP to work flexibly, it makes life so much better when designing to have more then enough 'flesh' on a photo to zoom in, crop, merge photos, collage, retouch, etc.

If this really is the route Canon is taking, I might just switch to Nikon again...


----------



## Grum (Feb 24, 2012)

Gav said:


> wow this is so funny.
> 
> I shoot with a Nikon D3s and D700. I decided to look at Canon today to see what was happening.
> 
> ...



Well said :clap:


----------



## parsek (Feb 24, 2012)

Yes and no. Not enough reason, not to just get a great deal on the 5D2 and have more to spend on great lenses. 

Need more MPs and a larger dynamic range in my next DSLR.


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 25, 2012)

RobS said:


> with this specs coming, canon has no body at all for my needs. So i will saving some month for MF or switch to nikon.
> There is no camera from canon at this date which will fit for studio phtographers. Especially when Nikon has a D800.
> Sure 22MP are enough but for composing there is no space to crop, and with MP over 30 there is plenty space to crop and even size down to a needed size to get the needed IQ
> 
> so i'm pretty sure i will leave the canon camp



Is being able to crop a little more really that big of a factor to you? It seems like learning to properly compose your shots would be a much cheaper solution...


----------



## EYEONE (Feb 25, 2012)

22mp, 61 point AF and 7fps is the perfect camera for me. If we can get at least one more stop better ISO performance I will be drooling for this camera. I couldn't ask for anything more at all.


----------



## Velo Steve (Feb 25, 2012)

A far as they go, the rumored specs look good. On the other hand, most of what I care about isn't addressed there.

My biggest need is better ISO performance for shooting wildlife in shaded or dawn/dusk situations. I'm not looking for "pretty good" noise at 12,800. Really great quality at 1600 would be more valuable. That will determine whether I buy this camera, and I probably will.

I also do 30 second exposures of the night sky with some frequency. If this camera gets rid of the many unnaturally reddish pixels or blotches I get in those shots, it would be really nice.

Sometimes I shoot sports, especially cycling. Really good autofocus on subjects moving toward the camera would be valuable. Extra points if it's available before the Amgen Tour of California in mid May.

The third big item for me (also not described in the rumored specs) is dynamic range. That white bird in the sun on a background of dark foliage could look a lot better with another stop or two of range. Or the cyclist in the sun with his face shaded by a helmet. Or the bride in white and groom in black, for you wedding photographers.

I really expect to want this camera, but I'll take a good look at tests and reviews before I place my order.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Feb 25, 2012)

randplaty said:


> Wow, I had no idea people actually cared about megapixels. Probably all of the photographers who love megapixels switched to Canon and all who hated switched to Nikon and now the companies are flip flopping.



i think no one cared about MP until nikon released the d800...

We'll see what happens, I think the d800 may be trying to please too many people - the reaction I'm hearing varies from love it and can't wait to, I would love it if i shot nothing but lanscapes. And the reverse is now true with canon (that is if these specs are spot on). This camera will fill the needs and then some of the vast majority of weddings photogs - and I believe that was the bulk of the market for the 5D series. If it ends up being priced right (and available by/before summer), there will be thousands shot on the mkiii.

Side bar note, this camera is not for the hobbyist/enthusiast - what I mean by that is this - without real needs, and most likely, not a budget minded as a pro would be - the hoobyist/enthusiast will be the ones who jump ship to nikon. And the silly thing is, many of them have probably already jumped from nikon to canon. So, from a marketing perspective, why would you design a pro body to satisfy the so called needs of the finicky enthusiasts? Because they have no actual needs, just wants, they are the hardest to please and the most likely to have disposable $$$ - and therefore the most likely to jump ship. If canon ends up making this the 5D, and the only body in that series they release this year, then watch all those who jumped ship do it again next year...

2 things I am thinking may happen ---

many talk about the crop feature of the d800, and the high MP of that body allows for major cropping. Maybe, just maybe, that's where we'll see the new canon crop come in...picture this:

A 7DII/7Dx (or maybe even rename to a 6D:

body would be pro, canon needs a pro crop (enough of this only the 1D series is all thats pro, so it would be a good move to counter nikon who boasts a pro crop)
so picture a crop body, boasting lets say, 28-30MP? 1.6 crop and 28MP would kill any argument of the wildlife togs that need extra reach and crop. Throw in a decent AF, decent ISO and some other bells and whistles and you have an amazing $2000 pro crop body that even FF shooters may consider as a back up/special needs cam.

Do that and toss in a 40+MP full frame (which who knows, this we may see this year) and you put nikon in a real pickle (and who knows, maybe nikon has something in their pipeline that better suits the needs of wedding togs)...

All in all, I am glad nikon did this. If canon was the only real player, canon could just sit back. With nikon putting out cutting edge, it forces canon to work harder, and that benefits all of us!


----------



## KeithR (Feb 29, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> i think no one cared about MP until nikon released the d800...


Nope.

Some of us have been intrigued about the prospects of _real_ high MP counts ever since Canon broke the news of their 50mp and 120mp prototype sensors, long before the D800 emerged.


----------



## jrista (Feb 29, 2012)

KeithR said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > i think no one cared about MP until nikon released the d800...
> ...



Absolutely. The 120mp APS-H was probably one of the most intriguing pieces of news I heard from Canon the last couple years. (Its obviously a bit impractical right now, as few lenses can resolve 220lp/mm even at their best aperture (which is often lower than necessary to achieve that anyway), but its still intriguing to know its possible, and that producing something more realistic, such as a 47mp FF sensor, is within the realm of practical.)


----------



## AprilForever (Feb 29, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> randplaty said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I had no idea people actually cared about megapixels. Probably all of the photographers who love megapixels switched to Canon and all who hated switched to Nikon and now the companies are flip flopping.
> ...



This would satisfy my photography needs!!! And, 3000 I would pay for it! +1


----------



## Camerajah (Feb 29, 2012)

Once the ISO 12,800 is fairly clean and its closer to 3 gran with good focusing points then I may bite and I am guided by the eyecup ie must be the same as the 7D & the 1 Series.

Had a dream where the mRAW was 12mp.


----------



## randplaty (Mar 1, 2012)

jrista said:


> KeithR said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



So megapixels are largely for the cropping ability? How many people out there do this? I would think that unless you're shooting at 400mm to 600mm consistently, which would not be the majority of photographers, you could always just get a longer lens. 

I currently shoot sRAW and have taken less than 50 clicks using the full raw on the 5D Mark II as opposed to over 100k clicks using sRAW. I personally would much rather have DR and other features than mpix. Mpix is probably close to last on priority list.


----------



## RedEye (Mar 1, 2012)

jrista said:


> KeithR said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...


----------



## jrista (Mar 1, 2012)

randplaty said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > KeithR said:
> ...



Beyond 400mm f/5.6, "longer"...or for that matter faster...generally means "to the tune of an ungodly price". The 300/2.8 L, 400/4 DO, 500/5 L, 600/4 L, even the 200-400/4 L all cost WAY beyond what the average or even somewhat above average person can afford most of the time (barring winning the lottery, hefty inheritance, literally struck gold, etc...you know, those kinds of things that happen to ordinary people every day.) So sure, you could always get a longer lens...if the lens itself is _within reach_.

As for features, I'm in the camp that believes everything can be improved in a well-rounded way, rather than simply focusing on just one thing...such as just high ISO, or just more megapixels. We already have a 116lp/mm resolution 18mp APS-C sensor, and we know how well it performs with three-year old fabrication techniques and image processors. That is equivalent to a 47mp FF sensor, however a 47mp sensor released today that had exactly the same pixel pitch (density) as a three-year old 18mp APS-C sensor... It would have the benefit of three additional years of research into improving quantum efficiency, reducing read and thermal noise, improved manufacturing techniques that produce more effective microlensing, backlit rather than frontlit sensor fabrication, etc. etc.

Sure, I want better DR. I think we can get about two full stops of better DR, even on a 47mp FF sensor. I think we could have ISO 12800, possibly even ISO 25600 if you were willing to spend the money, along with a high 7-9fps frame rate, a decent AF system, AND better DR, all in one camera. Why? Well, the D800 performs pretty damn well on the DR and noise front for being a 36.3mp sensor, thanks to Sony Exmor technology which drastically lowers read noise (among other things). Because with an improved noise floor comes direct improvements in maximum ISO, by up to a stop. Improved quantum efficiency gained by say using a backlit sensor and/or improved microlensing would leave additional headroom, allowing for further gains on the maximum ISO front. I believe a 47mp full-frame sensor is possible because we already have numerous Canon cameras, from entry level to pro grade, using 18mp APS-C sensors that use the exact same pixel pitch, and (excluding low ISO read noise, which could be corrected at least by the Sony approach of embedding hyper parallelized ADC on-sensor) they perform extremely well.

I'd love to have ALL of that above right now, but I'd be happy to start with less than that and save myself some cache. Start with 32mp, maybe a stop improvement in DR, and one stop improvement to native high ISO (12800), coupled with a nice 61pt/21ct AF system, 100k RGB metering sensor, and I'll gladly spend $3500....in a heartbeat. I'd also gladly spend another $3500 three years down the road for that full 47mp, another extra stop in DR and maybe another extra stop of high ISO (and if thats not possible, well, we'll chalk it up to physical limitations, as that would most likely be why). I'd be quite comfortable with a 47mp, ISO 12800 (native), 61/21pt AF system that does at least 7fps for a LONG time. Even stuck with a 400mm lens, I'd at least have cropping power...and even the grand total of $7000 over three years is still half the $14000 price tag for a single, monstrous 600mm f/4 L series lens (something I wouldn't even consider myself fully qualified to use until I've had another several years of practice anyway.) (Do I think the price is too optimistic...maybe...but the D800 seems to be going for $3000, and its most of the way there already...so I don't think its unrealistic.)


----------



## MichaelB4U (Mar 1, 2012)

Coming from the 5DMark 11 & ready to upgrade I have a lot of interest in both the Nikon 800 and the Canon 1DX even though its a completely different beast. Like everyone I have heard the rumours of a 22 MP 5D Mark111 spec up but doubt it will do enough at that level to gain my interest. I will be watching but more keen for a quality 36 MP model. Bring it on Canon Nikon has made the challenge!


----------



## Circles (Mar 1, 2012)

I think so.


----------



## randplaty (Mar 1, 2012)

jrista said:


> Beyond 400mm f/5.6, "longer"...or for that matter faster...generally means "to the tune of an ungodly price". The 300/2.8 L, 400/4 DO, 500/5 L, 600/4 L, even the 200-400/4 L all cost WAY beyond what the average or even somewhat above average person can afford most of the time (barring winning the lottery, hefty inheritance, literally struck gold, etc...you know, those kinds of things that happen to ordinary people every day.) So sure, you could always get a longer lens...if the lens itself is _within reach_.
> 
> As for features, I'm in the camp that believes everything can be improved in a well-rounded way, rather than simply focusing on just one thing...such as just high ISO, or just more megapixels. We already have a 116lp/mm resolution 18mp APS-C sensor, and we know how well it performs with three-year old fabrication techniques and image processors. That is equivalent to a 47mp FF sensor, however a 47mp sensor released today that had exactly the same pixel pitch (density) as a three-year old 18mp APS-C sensor... It would have the benefit of three additional years of research into improving quantum efficiency, reducing read and thermal noise, improved manufacturing techniques that produce more effective microlensing, backlit rather than frontlit sensor fabrication, etc. etc.
> 
> ...



Hmmm, so you do shoot with a 400mm lens. That's the biggest difference I suppose. I shoot with a 200mm lens max and that's because we shoot different subjects. I understand you think we can have a well rounded camera that gives you all of the features, but if you couldn't, which features would you sacrifice first? Which would be most important to you?


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 1, 2012)

jrista said:


> randplaty said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



If a 47MP FF had the same IQ as the 18MP APS-C I would be a sad panda (yes i will not only change brand of camera but species too ;D )


----------



## hummingbird (Mar 1, 2012)

I really think so. I decided not to buy the markII, so whatever comes will be a great upgrade for me.


----------



## torger (Mar 1, 2012)

I have the 5D mark II, and I don't think the mark III will provide anything significant for my needs. It's probably a nice all-around camera, but no features I really need as a landscape photographer.

Had it been higher resolution or significantly higher DR at base ISO (yet to see!) I would have been interested.

I'll wait and see if Canon will do any high resolution camera. The lack of D800E response have actually made me interested in digital medium format. With second hand digital back it is less expensive than one may think, still a lot more expensive than 35mm DSLRs though.

But say if Canon won't make a high resolution camera in the coming three year period, I may just be better off halting my Canon system investment, sell off some of it I already have and get a medium format tech camera for my landscape work. "Switching" to Nikon does not seem as a good idea, since I'm a tilt-shift lens user. Nikon's lenses are not too impressive. Canon has the TS-E 24mm II. I'd like to see an upgrade of the 45 and 90 mm real soon though.


----------



## jrista (Mar 1, 2012)

randplaty said:


> Hmmm, so you do shoot with a 400mm lens. That's the biggest difference I suppose. I shoot with a 200mm lens max and that's because we shoot different subjects. I understand you think we can have a well rounded camera that gives you all of the features, but if you couldn't, which features would you sacrifice first? Which would be most important to you?



Tough question, as it depends on what I may be shooting. I guess most of the time I shoot birds and wildlife, so I'd pick ISO, AF/Frame Rate, and MP (in that order). DR isn't really all that critical, as at higher ISO you're limited in terms of DR anyway, and read noise doesn't eat away at it like it does at lower ISO. I would be willing to forgo megapixels in favor of better (lower noise) higher ISO performance and better AF and frame rate capabilities, as those are really critical for shooting action (of any kind really, not just wildlife/birds.) 

I still love to shoot landscapes though. When it comes to landscapes, hands down DR and MP. I could really care less about ISO higher than 800 when it comes to landscapes, so long as I have the maximum amount of DR possible, and as many megapixels as I can get. My goal with landscape photography is to shoot bright, brilliant nature scapes (land, sky, water, and astrophotography), and print monstrously huge. Think foot by foot print dimensions that fill expansive walls with stunning scenery. 

It were being completely honest here, I'd obviously take two cameras for all that. I'd happily stick with my 7D (or, if one is released that improves read noise/ISO...a 7D II) for as long as I can. I could probably use a better AF system (the 1D X's is certainly drool worthy!), but at its price point, its really hard to beat the 7D in any way, and 19 cross-type AF points and 8fps shooting is so far quite adequate for panning birds in flight, even at lower ISO. Depending on what the big megapixel Canon camera that has been rumored for end of year is, and how much it costs, I may hold out for that as a landscape camera. If it really is 40mp+, has better noise characteristics, and true 14-stop DR @ ISO 100, I'll buy one in a heartbeat (so long as it doesn't land with a $7000 price tag, and isn't dedicated to HDSLR/Cinema video features.) Otherwise, I've already saved up most of the money for a 5D III (the higher price tag has caught me off guard a bit, but I think the 7D will tide me over till the end of the year at least, as landscape has slid to second place behind bird photography as my passion.)

(Wicketwombat's comment about 7D IQ is rather naive, and if you look at any 7D photos on 1x.com, 500px.com, Flickr, DeviantArt, etc. you'll see how stellar the IQ of a 7D really is...for landscapes or birds and wildlife. Its three years old at this point, and lacks the low read noise a Sony Exmor sensor has...however INCLUDING low read noise, a 47mp FF sensor would be a true thing of beauty! From both a low-level hardware specifications standpoint and actual real-world performance, the 7D is an excellent camera that offers great IQ at ISO 200-1600, and acceptable IQ everywhere else...its reputation otherwise us rather underserved, and primarily fueled by 100% crop nit-picking and severe misunderstandings about the physics of light, diffraction, and how they affect IQ for such a high-resolution sensor. Shoot a photo at f/5.6 or greater on any lens, and lens resolution drops below sensor resolution...no matter what you do, everything will look soft at a pixel level from that point on...despite the fact that you are still getting more or as much detail than any lower resolution sensor.)


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 1, 2012)

but thats my point the sensor tech needs to improve to address the issues that cause the APS-C sensor to be inferior to the full frame and APS-H sensors. just taking the same tech and making it bigger would be horrible.

I was more descriptive here
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,3739.0.html


----------



## jrista (Mar 1, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> but thats my point the sensor tech needs to improve to address the issues that cause the APS-C sensor to be inferior to the full frame and APS-H sensors. just taking the same tech and making it bigger would be horrible.



Oh, certainly...I wasn't advocating that. I was using it as a basis from a resolution standpoint, at 116lp/mm, you would need a 47mp sensor to have the same pixel pitch. I would most certainly expect such a sensor to be "modern" in every sense of the word, pushing the envelope wherever possible...to enlarge three year old tech would be unacceptable.


----------

