# Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 16, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/canons-next-full-frame-camera-cr2/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/canons-next-full-frame-camera-cr2/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/canons-next-full-frame-camera-cr2/"></a></div>
<strong>Fall 2012


</strong>Once again, we hear about a new “entry level” full frame camera being added to the Canon lineup in the fall. The specs for the camera have been quite broad, which is normal when there are various prototypes out and about. Below are the most talked about specifications, and probably the closest to the actual camera.</p>
<p><strong>Specifications</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>22mp (Same sensor as 5D3)</li>
<li>19 AF Points</li>
<li>4fps</li>
<li>ISO 100-51200</li>
<li>3″ LCD</li>
<li>Smaller than the 5D Mark II</li>
<li>More Plastic than metal in the construction</li>
<li>Pop-Up Flash (On at least one prototype)</li>
<li>$1999 USD at launch</li>
<li>Launched with a new non-L full frame kit lens (Undisclosed what the lens is)</li>
<li>Compatible with full frame STM lenses</li>
</ul>
<p>Lots more to come on this topic.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p> </p>
```


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jul 16, 2012)

Just what many were waiting for ! I might consider at that price.

Canon 9D ?


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jul 16, 2012)

Bring it... does this mean the MKII is going to be discontinued?


----------



## Astro (Jul 16, 2012)

canon can only hope the rumored D600 price or specs are wrong...



> •24.7MP full frame sensor
> •Weight: 760g (850g with battery and memory cards), the D800 weights 900g
> •3.2" LCD with 921K dot with ambient sensor control
> •HDMI output
> ...



first leaked images for those who still think it´s just a vapor product:

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/06/14/first-leaked-nikon-d600-images.aspx/

i think that´s a pretty tough competitor.
especially when the 24MP sony sensor plays in the same league as the D800 sensor.


----------



## Menace (Jul 16, 2012)

Will be Interesting to see if the pop up flash makes it to the final version


----------



## traveller (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> canon can only hope the rumored D600 price or specs are wrong...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



+1

This is shaping up to be another D7000 - 60D debacle for Canon. The D600 specifications look pretty real, Canon had better hope that Nikon don't launch it at US$1500; come to think of it, Canon better hope that Nikon don't launch at US$1999 either!


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

the D600 seems to be BIT FOR BIT the better camera and the better deal.

2012 is sure not canons year.


----------



## kirillica (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon tries to push people switch from 5Dm2 to this entry level OR to 5Dm3, because anyways this one should be better?


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 16, 2012)

Is the 19pt AF the one from the 7D? I guess what I'm really asking is does the 7D have that many AF points? 

For me, this seems like the ideal upgrade from y 5Dc. Sure, I'd love a 5dIII, but the bottom line is as an ameture that works maybe 4 jobs a year, I'm not going to be able to justify that cost. Compared to the 5DII, this rumored list is a little more punch of an upgrade. Though unless the pop up flash can act as a wireless controller i'd just as soon not have it. 

-Brian


----------



## Astro (Jul 16, 2012)

i hope the specs are not the final ones. thought it´s a small chance to see a new improved canon sensor this year.

i had hoped canon would bring a killer entry level FF camera.
a camera nikon could not match in price and features.

i have no doubt that canon sales will be good.
but in the enthusiast market (and i don´t mean people who don´t have to care about the money) canon loses some traction.

i love photography and i would call myself an enthusiast... but im not making money with it.
so i can´t justify a 6000$ camera... and a 5D MK3 is not worth the money when i compare it to a 5D MK2... not for me.


so ask yourself, what would you buy as a starter? 
to me the D600 looks like a great deal.


----------



## 7enderbender (Jul 16, 2012)

How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?


----------



## Alumina (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> the D600 seems to be BIT FOR BIT the better camera and the better deal.
> 
> 2012 is sure not canons year.



Exactly my thoughts. I'm starting to think my next camera might actually be a Nikon if this trend keeps up. I'm going to wait until/if they announce the 7D mark2 before I make any decisions though. Right now Nikon simply gives better specs for less money. I'm not THAT invested in lenses yet so I guess I'll have to see.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Jul 16, 2012)

I can't wait for such a camera…
Why? Because my wife started using my 5dmk3, she fell in love with it and no longer loves her 60D….and i can't afford to buy another 5D  So…this would fit her just nice! And my wallet too..hehe


----------



## sky87 (Jul 16, 2012)

dilbert said:


> > *22mp (Same sensor as 5D3)*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Correct me if i'm wrong, to my understanding the sensor in the 5D mkiii uses gapless microlenese technology unlike the sensor in the 5D mkii.


----------



## FunPhotons (Jul 16, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?



Good points. CR2, however it's hard to believe that this set of specs makes any sense.


----------



## Astro (Jul 16, 2012)

sky87 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > > *22mp (Same sensor as 5D3)*
> ...



i think nobody said/meant the sensors are 100% IDENTICAL.

but compared to the D800 sensor canons sensor design has only made a baby jump compared to a Dwight Philipps jump.

the 5D MK3 sensor seems to be 80% based on the 4 year old design.


----------



## rsalles64 (Jul 16, 2012)

Love the idea of having a AF similar to 7D, and to have a pop up flash. I like this spec very much.


----------



## simonxu11 (Jul 16, 2012)

sky87 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > > *22mp (Same sensor as 5D3)*
> ...


Canon used gapless microlenese on 50D in 2008, compare to the 40D there's not enough IQ improvement. Now it's the same story between 5D2 and 5D3


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?


+1 It does not. I cannot understand why so many forum readers were waiting for something so similar and in many aspects inferior camera to 5DmkII. More plastic ? really? for the same price of 5DMkII? For a slightly better sensor? (possibly crippled by more powerful AA filter?) It is possibly a nice camera for non 5DmkII owners. But for 5DmkII onwners this rumored camera is a joke!

P.S I guess it will not have replaceable screens...


----------



## pdirestajr (Jul 16, 2012)

Buying a 5D mkii now is the best deal for a 35mm digital camera. I don't care if/ when it's "technology" is 10+ years old, it is still going to allow me to take fantastic photos!

I for one will be using my 7D & 5Dii till they die. All my other money will just go to glass and in my pocket


----------



## Chewy734 (Jul 16, 2012)

This camera sounds worse overall than the current 5D2. If they want to have an entry level FF camera, they need to make this cost less... $1499 at the absolute max. The AF is probably better, but other than that... 

If they want to pit this against the upcoming D600, then the price needs to be much lower, since the D600 looks better on paper.


----------



## Ricku (Jul 16, 2012)

Yaaawn!

Still waiting for a FF camera from Canon, that offers a real IQ upgrade over the 5D2.

You know.. Like Nikon's D800 does.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Jul 16, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> Buying a 5D mkii now is the best deal for a 35mm digital camera. I don't care if/ when it's "technology" is 10+ years old, it is still going to allow me to take fantastic photos!
> 
> I for one will be using my 7D & 5Dii till they die. All my other money will just go to glass and in my pocket



Agreed. The 5D MK2 is a FANTASTIC camera and is more than enough for 98% of photographers out there who don't shoot sports. I've been talking to more and more high-end fashion/commercial photographers and what do they use? 5D MK2 or Medium Format. 

This entry-level camera makes sense to me. More AF points, more plastic, 22MP. It has more technology than the 5D MK2, but not the build quality.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 16, 2012)

Am I good or what? Exactly what I've been predicting for months now. You can expect the 70D to have pretty much the same specs, with an APS-C sensor.

7DII will be essentially the 5DIII with an APS-C sensor. It's all perfectly logical and predictable.

What's with all the whining? Did you really expect to get all the 5DIII features for half the price? If you think Nikon is better, get a Nikon. That's how the marketplace works. 

Personally, I like these specs. Plenty of room to differentiate the 70D and this model from the 7DII and the 5DIII.


----------



## MacDarcy (Jul 16, 2012)

Is that $1,999 for the camera AND the kit lens? Or just the body? 

Cause if it's for the camera AND the kit lens....I am soooooo buying one. $1,499 would be sweet for a entry level full frame.


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> Buying a 5D mkii now is the best deal for a 35mm digital camera. I don't care if/ when it's "technology" is 10+ years old, it is still going to allow me to take fantastic photos!
> 
> I for one will be using my 7D & 5Dii till they die. All my other money will just go to glass and in my pocket



+1


----------



## squarebox (Jul 16, 2012)

as a hobbyist, I don't really need 61 AF points or the fps, and this camera is very tempting. I'm also very curious about that non-L kit lens that would come with it.


----------



## CatfishSoupFTW (Jul 16, 2012)

not bad, but it seems like its not entirely worth 2 grand. 19 AF points and more of a plastic body? -_- smaller form factor I guess isnt so bad, but if its looking like I rebel, then no thank you. pop up flash, I suppose is an added bonus, something you dont see in the 5D line. its been a savior here and there. But I think I will keep my eyes on the mrk3 for my next purchase.


----------



## lonelywhitelights (Jul 16, 2012)

I know it's only rumoured specs but those don't get me excited at all

5DII is still the better option even with it's ancient AF system


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2012)

MacDarcy said:


> Is that $1,999 for the camera AND the kit lens? Or just the body?
> 
> Cause if it's for the camera AND the kit lens....I am soooooo buying one. $1,499 would be sweet for a entry level full frame.


Unless the kit lens is a 18-55 maybe? and the camera costs 1900 body only? ;D


----------



## lonelywhitelights (Jul 16, 2012)

RGomezPhotos said:


> pdirestajr said:
> 
> 
> > Buying a 5D mkii now is the best deal for a 35mm digital camera. I don't care if/ when it's "technology" is 10+ years old, it is still going to allow me to take fantastic photos!
> ...



+1 to both,

I've used both 5DII and 5DIII in the studio and within a studio environment I can find literally NO difference in the cameras, the upgraded AF system is useless since I shoot manual focus 99% of the time and the 5DII AF , however ancient, is still perfectly adequate. This is why I have not upgraded to 5DIII - it's almost a pointless upgrade for studio shooters - definitely pointless given the price AND the fact that the 5DII gives identical results. Currently, if I were to upgrade, the only way to go is medium format but still the 5DII is going to be a workhorse for a few more years I think - It's a bloody fantastic camera.


----------



## meli (Jul 16, 2012)

It does sound like a repackaged 5d2. The probability of inheriting 7D's AF sounds promising and the package might come awfully close to mark3 for 1.5k less; perhaps some features chopping is due.

on another note, i seriously wonder about Canon's product planners abilities. 5years ago they were alone in the game and now they're being dragged around. Suddenly Canon who was in the frontier of FF finds itself stalling with cameras between 18 & 22mp and the competition ( that 5 yrs ago didnt even had FF) has models spanning from 12 to 36mp


----------



## DanielW (Jul 16, 2012)

Well, being a 60D owner who can't justify $3000+ on a camera for chasing sunsets, I really like the specs! 
- Plastic doesn't bother me (my 60D has plenty of it and it has never kept me from doing anything), although I have to acknowledge a metal body feels great in the hand. 
- Smaller size is also good, I guess, because as a FF camera, it can't be made too small for men's hands and will be lighter than a 5DmII/III.
- The sensor should be more than good enough, even if Nikon's got a better one and has won the round.
- 19 AF points, like the 7D? Well, everybody likes it on the 7D, and if I've managed to live with only 9 so far.
- 4 fps, well, not that great, but I can't see myself needing to go any faster.
- ISO 100-51,200: now that would be some improvement for me!
- Having a built-in flash that can act as a commander seals the deal for me.
- $2000? Well, I can wait a little... BUT, sure it shouldn't cost more than the Nikon "equivalent".
The 5DmII is sure a great camera, but the built-in flash and the better AF are important to me as I can buy one less flash and have more keepers of my soon-to-come kid.
Is the D600 better? Oh, I'll have all my needs taken care of with the 6D or whatever they call it. I don't care if my neighbors will have a better toy; mine will be great _for me_ already.


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 16, 2012)

That's good news in MY OPINION so far:
- FF might be a future standard option for DSLRs and this might lead to a compact FF mirrorless
- 16 (red illuminated) AF points might be sufficient for 99.9% of situations 
- 4 FPS are enough for landscape, macro etc.
- 1999$/EUR are reasonable if it goes down to 1499$/EUR after 6 months
- if it's compatible with STM focus drives it might have an AF mode for video and live view

And I don't like to read the lamentations about "D600 is better than the new Canon FF" - both do not exist in our hands and we cannot compare them really. And ... I have spent a lot of money in some glass for the Canon EF mount - switching to Nikon is not a matter of saving (hypothetically) 500$/EUR, its to buy a lot of Nikkors ... oh, impossible, I cannot replace all the glass I need because Nikon has not these options ...


----------



## RC (Jul 16, 2012)

A FF camera with a 7D like (or better) AF is certainly attractive to me. The plastic body is definitely a turn off and could be a deal breaker for me. I'm OK with the 5DII sensor if that is what Canon has to do to keep the price down. Keep the form factor no smaller than the 7D, lose the pop up flash (unless it has radio trigger) and no swivel screen and you've got my attention. 

This could be an excellent combo with my 7D.

I want a 5D3 but don't know when or if I can afford/justify the cost.

Oh and it must have AFMA


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2012)

RC said:


> A FF camera with a 7D like (or better) AF is certainly attractive to me. The plastic body is definitely a turn off and could be a deal breaker for me. I'm OK with the 5DII sensor if that is what Canon has to do to keep the price down. Keep the form factor no smaller than the 7D, lose the pop up flash (unless it has radio trigger) and no swivel screen and you've got my attention.
> 
> This could be an excellent combo with my 7D.
> 
> ...


+1.
So practically you need a 5DMkII with updated AF (like the one that exists on 7D). Sounds good to me. As a 5DmkII owner I could not agree more.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 16, 2012)

I find that a lot of users do not understand the upgrades over the 5D Mark II:

Autofocus system: beat to death

More important:

Auto ISO over the full range in manual mode,
In-camera HDR and in-camera ME, 9 shots max each
ISO safety shift in Av mode with a min shutter speed and auto ISO over full range

That is why it is $1400 over the 5D Mark II.


----------



## CanonCameraFan (Jul 16, 2012)

Well I like the sound of it  Smaller and lighter than the 5D mark ii (for those of us who find a camera sporting a medium telephoto zoom L lens HEAVY)  19 auto focus points  51200 ISO  Pop up flash  auto focus in movie mode??? If it takes STM lenses that is a possibility ??? And could the sensor be a bigger version of the one in the 650D? It's mostly speculation at the moment anyway and what suits one won't suit another - guaranteed. :


----------



## Orion (Jul 16, 2012)

I can't believe how this is actually being taken as a serious option FOR ANYBODY. Over $2000 with taxes . . if you are a serious photographer, then get a mkIII and mean it. The laod of crap they saturate tyhe market witrh these days is amazing . . . thanks to the sheep out there. And thank god for plastic, and $2000 FF cameras too . . . profit grab, nothing else. So, I guess the 5DmkII will be around $1000 now.


----------



## Axilrod (Jul 16, 2012)

mb66energy said:


> And I don't like to read the lamentations about "D600 is better than the new Canon FF" - both do not exist in our hands and we cannot compare them really. And ... I have spent a lot of money in some glass for the Canon EF mount - switching to Nikon is not a matter of saving (hypothetically) 500$/EUR, its to buy a lot of Nikkors ... oh, impossible, I cannot replace all the glass I need because Nikon has not these options ...



I agree, too much spec racing going on and we dont have confirmation yet, the D600 could end up being the same price for all we know. And the D800 feels so cheap I'd be scared to see what a $1500 D600 felt like, probably all plastic and flimsy as crap.


----------



## bkorcel (Jul 16, 2012)

2000.00 for an "entry level". In my opinion this one is quite boring. Come on Canon you can do better for $2K.


----------



## RC (Jul 16, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> I find that a lot of users do not understand the upgrades over the 5D Mark II:
> 
> Autofocus system: beat to death
> 
> ...



And that is why I really want a 5D3. But cost and justification is my issue.


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Autofocus system: beat to death


I agree that would be very useful indeed...



bdunbar79 said:


> Auto ISO over the full range in manual mode,
> ISO safety shift in Av mode with a min shutter speed and auto ISO over full range


All these could be done in firmware. It is Ridiculous that Canon charges so much...



bdunbar79 said:


> In-camera HDR and in-camera ME, 9 shots max each


This may seem nice but it's a gimmick. Plus I read that it produces jpeg file. Please correct me if I am wrong (I do write this from memory).


----------



## 7enderbender (Jul 16, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> Buying a 5D mkii now is the best deal for a 35mm digital camera. I don't care if/ when it's "technology" is 10+ years old, it is still going to allow me to take fantastic photos!
> 
> I for one will be using my 7D & 5Dii till they die. All my other money will just go to glass and in my pocket




I here you. Instead of upgrading my computer, maybe I should buy a second 5DII body as backup/reserve. It works for me and it'll be good enough as long as it works (or gets serviced by Canon). Sure a Mark III would be nice, but then to take really advantage I'd have to upgrade my speedlites as well. Seems too much money for a marginal benefit.


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 16, 2012)

To all complaining about no new sensor... do you really expect canon to put a BETTER sensor and an IMPROVED sensor in a camera BELOW it's beloved 5d3? Really? I could see them launching a camera maybe above the 5d3 or maybe even above the 1dx to really show off a new sensor... but if you expect a much better sensor below the 5d3... keep dreaming.


----------



## Stuart (Jul 16, 2012)

With that extra ISO and the pop up flash, this could be my one camera does all upgrade from the 60D.
As long as its got good results up to 3200.
Is this my new hobbyist studio/events body. If so i'll take a 17-40mm lens too please.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> I find that a lot of users do not understand the upgrades over the 5D Mark II:
> 
> Autofocus system: beat to death
> 
> ...



You forget a couple of my favorites:

*** Silent shutter option -this can be priceless
*** auto-save setting changes when in custom "C1 - C3" modes


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

kirillica said:


> Canon tries to push people switch from 5Dm2 to this entry level OR to 5Dm3, because anyways this one should be better?



Dont see how you jump to that concusion?


----------



## sleepnever (Jul 16, 2012)

Hmmm this is indeed going to be interesting. I'm looking for my next jump from the Rebel series and I only have the one 24-70L Canon glass that I would have to sell to do so. I'm not trolling. Honestly, whoever can offer me the better camera for my needs at a price point that is doable, will get my money. That being said, I also want to see the so-called 70D or 7Dmk2 before I throw any money down. 

If I had to say right now, based on these specs vs the D600...hello D600 for entry FF.


----------



## pdirestajr (Jul 16, 2012)

But the real question is... will the red focus point light stay on?

My EOS-3 has more useful features than any non 1-series digital camera. Canon has been taking features away from us for years!


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

Etienne said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I find that a lot of users do not understand the upgrades over the 5D Mark II:
> ...



+2 fps which with the new AF makes it OK for sports/action


----------



## Astro (Jul 16, 2012)

mb66energy said:


> And ... I have spent a lot of money in some glass for the Canon EF mount - switching to Nikon is not a matter of saving (hypothetically) 500$/EUR, its to buy a lot of Nikkors ... oh, impossible, I cannot replace all the glass I need because Nikon has not these options ...



you must have more as is in your signature then....



> EF-S 10-22 | 60 || EF 24 | 40 | 100 | 70-200 | 400 || 2 x 40D || 2x TC



i woudl have no problems to switch .... except for the money i had to invest.


----------



## bestimage (Jul 16, 2012)

what about high mega pixel pro camera with better quality sensor


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I find that a lot of users do not understand the upgrades over the 5D Mark II:
> ...



Is that all you see in the 5D3?


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

Reading through this thread, it's very clear that almost all Rebel and xxD users are very excited about this camera. Canon will be delighted - they are attracting exactly the upgraders they are looking for, leaving upgraders from the 5DII to aspire to the 5DIII.

I won't be exchanging my 5DII but if I didn't have a 5DII, I'd consider the new body's AF alone to be worth more than the 5DII's magnesium body. Wireless flash command and a fractionally better sensor would be icing on the cake.

One possible fly in the ointment is that I doubt the new body will have AFMA, which would be a pity.


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > And ... I have spent a lot of money in some glass for the Canon EF mount - switching to Nikon is not a matter of saving (hypothetically) 500$/EUR, its to buy a lot of Nikkors ... oh, impossible, I cannot replace all the glass I need because Nikon has not these options ...
> ...



It's just that simple:
- Nikon has no 5.6 400mm option (which is lightweight, has great IQ and cost me just 1240 Euro new)
which makes a good 11 800mm with the TC
- Nikon has no 4.0 70-200 option (which is lightweight, has excellent IQ). 
- Nikon has no 4 lens element 40mm (or 35mm) lens with excellent IQ and contralight properties.

I am shure that Nikon produces excellent products but the Canon product range *gives me the chance to fullfill my requirements in terms* of a good combination of image quality + compactness/acceptable weight + affordability (?right word?). Bodies and lens are a *tool set* which acts like systems always act: It is the combination of the pieces *which gives the system its higher order capabilities*.

Best - Michael


----------



## EOBeav (Jul 16, 2012)

Wow! This is a perfect opportunity to reiterate how glad I am that I bought my 5DmkII last December. <$2kUSD, and the vendor even threw in a 16G card and a decent Lowepro bag.


----------



## syder (Jul 16, 2012)

Etienne said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I find that a lot of users do not understand the upgrades over the 5D Mark II:
> ...



and

2 extra stops of usable high-iso video
no moire and significantly reduced anti-aliasing
headphone jack
audio gain control and levels without magic lantern

While you may continue to complain that none of these changes make the blindest bit of difference to you - the simple fact is that they do for an awful lot of other people, which is why they're prepared to pay for them.


----------



## pakosouthpark (Jul 16, 2012)

nikon d600 wins this specs.. and only in fall of 2012?? disappointing really..! 
why not a mirrorless FF? it's about time to canon push things over! like apple does!! at the moment they are just following what others do..


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

I'd just like to add a "woohoo" that we have something new to create a 30+ page thread from. Woohoo!


----------



## Trovador (Jul 16, 2012)

The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?. 

Don't get me wrong, the 5D MkII is an excellent camera and will be relevant for years to come, but for the same price I'd be all over the new entry level model. I'd be more than willing to trade off the weather sealing for the added hardware.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > @astro - tell us what kit you have so we can understand where you are coming from
> ...



As an ex user of a 5D2 the AF improvement is significant - but a long way from being the only improvement.

You being a Canon user since 1984 just means you have been using Canon kit about the same length of time as me. For all I know you might still be using a 300D or a 1DX.

I dont understand why you are fixated on 5DII users upgrading to a 5DIII. If I still had my 5DII I wouldn't upgrade - however for those non 5DII users - perhaps those with 60Ds - there are a lot of good features which might mean they go to the 5DIII and skip the 5DII or an entry level FF.

I think it is right that we give these people balanced, informed information to allow them to make their own mind up.

The fact that I have to keep coming posting to correct biased or incorrect information reflects badly on this forum


----------



## Astro (Jul 16, 2012)

Trovador said:


> The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.



if canon would be the only camera maker it sure looks like a good deal.
compared to the rumored D600... well... no.

and you have to understand the different needs.

for me the 5D MK3 sensor has no real advantage.
i shot below ISO 1600 99% of the time.

i shoot landscape, macro and home studio studio stuff.
85% of the time i use the center AF point.

i shot no video.

so why should people like me update to a 5D MK3 or this new FF camera?

from a company point of view it sure makes sense.
but we are individuals here, with individual needs.


----------



## RC (Jul 16, 2012)

AdamJ said:


> ...One possible fly in the ointment is that I doubt the new body will have AFMA, which would be a pity.



No AFMA, I won't even consider, that is a sure deal breaker!


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> so why should people like me update to a 5D MK3 or this new FF camera?
> 
> from a company point of view it sure makes sense.
> but we are individuals here, with individual needs.



No one is saying you should upgrade.

Everyone should be free to decide - but the information needed to decide should be available to them in an objective and unbiased form


----------



## AAPhotog (Jul 16, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > And I don't like to read the lamentations about "D600 is better than the new Canon FF" - both do not exist in our hands and we cannot compare them really. And ... I have spent a lot of money in some glass for the Canon EF mount - switching to Nikon is not a matter of saving (hypothetically) 500$/EUR, its to buy a lot of Nikkors ... oh, impossible, I cannot replace all the glass I need because Nikon has not these options ...
> ...


One of the major differences between the 5d2 and 5d3 is the autofocus. That to me is the reason why the 5d3 costs 1500 more. Although this entry level full frame wont have an AF as good as thre 5d3, it is rumored to be an upgrade from the 5d2. So why isn't it worth the same price as the 5d2 again? Basically the only difference between the 5d2 and 5d3 is the AF and thats worth $1500 in that case. but this AF UPGRADE isn't worth the same price? Im lost. and this is coming from a 5d3 owner.


----------



## Trovador (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> Trovador said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.
> ...



Well, it's impossible to please everyone so one must find a system that best suits their needs based on one's current's situation... For me I see plenty of them...I own a 7D and a complete kit of L lenses (which to me are reason enough to stay with Canon and not consider Nikon). Camera bodies come and go.

I have a 7D and a am looking to also buy a FF to take full advantage of my current lenses. The 5D MkIII is over my budget, leaving the 5D mKII as my only choice. The rumored features of the new entry level FF hit the spot for my needs. Better autofocus, a sensor with better low light performance, popr up flash with wireless, etc... where do I sign up?.


----------



## AAPhotog (Jul 16, 2012)

Wonder why he deleted his post... hmmm


----------



## D_Rochat (Jul 16, 2012)

AAPhotog said:


> WTF is up with everyone and this word troll??? Shut the ****** up already. Too much internet lingo. You need a life. Im a troll, why? Because I don't sit on internet forums wasting my life away? Or because I voice MY opinion



troll
1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase “trolling for newbies” which in turn comes from mainstream “trolling”, a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. See also YHBT.

2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, “Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll.” 



AAPhotog said:


> Wonder why he deleted his post... hmmm



The mods are deleting posts and issuing warnings......


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> The mods are deleting posts and issuing warnings......



Good !!

Personal insults do nothing to add to a discussion


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

Trovador said:


> Well, it's impossible to please everyone so one must find a system that best suits their needs based on one's current's situation... For me I see plenty of them...I own a 7D and a complete kit of L lenses (which to me are reason enough to stay with Canon and not consider Nikon). Camera bodies come and go.
> 
> I have a 7D and a am looking to also buy a FF to take full advantage of my current lenses. The 5D MkIII is over my budget, leaving the 5D mKII as my only choice. The rumored features of the new entry level FF hit the spot for my needs. Better autofocus, a sensor with better low light performance, popr up flash with wireless, etc... where do I sign up?.



You're Canon's target buyer for the new body. There will be many, many more with the same reasoning.


----------



## D_Rochat (Jul 16, 2012)

Back on track. Like others have mentioned, I think this is a solid upgrade for people using the 60D or lower and are wanting to get into a FF. Not really an upgrade for the 5DII users, but it's not meant to be.


----------



## Radiating (Jul 16, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?




If you don't think there is a noticable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor then maybe you could tell me if you notice a difference between these photos:







That's a back to back comparison with the 5D3 resized to 5D2 size. The 5D3 sensor has a significantly better AA filter that is more efficient in terms of preventing lost detail for a given level of moire reduction and so produces sharper images.

Furthermore many of the people saying that the 5D3 isn't that much better in ISO are not comparing the cameras correctly in likely two ways. Camera manufactuers generally make up their cameras ISO ratings out of thin air. There are a few acceptable ways of rating ISO but most manufacturers chose fringe methods which aren't widely respected so the can make up their ISO numbers as they see fit and when the 5D2 was released the ISO ratings were very optimistic to say the least with ISO 12800 being actually around what is commonly accepted as ISO 7000. With the 5D3 Canon has been less optimistic so ISO 12800 is actually a "true" ISO of 10000. The point is that people are comparing cameras using their RATED ISO which are on different scales not ISO measured on the same scale. It's like comparing a car going 0-60 kph vs a car that's going 0-60 mph, which doesn't make sense. The other issue is that after speaking to several Canon Techs and Reps, it seems that Canon specially designed the 5D3 to produce very low noise JPG's for photographers that have to shoot in JPG. Part of the innovation that they introduced was software but they also engineered the hardware to help in the process to make the noise coming from the sensor have far less speckle noise and have a very gausian distribution. This makes computer programs able to distinguish from the noise easier so when you apply noise reduction there is a slight advantage to the 5D3 of around a quarter of a stop more than the RAW data would suggest.


In any case here's a comparison between the 5D3 and the 5D2 rendered at the same resolution with the same ACR settings applied at a true ISO of 10084 for both cameras, this is a combination of a series of exposures using a method developed in consultation with the Cambridge Signal Processing Lab. I do consulting for a few camera review websites to develop testing methods and put this together for a project, with permission from all collaborators.

In any case feel free to spot the difference between the 5D2 and 5D3.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jul 16, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?



Canon kinda did the same thing with the 1000D vs the 400D. The 400D really is the better of these two so when I wanted to buy a small SLR for those moments when I prefer not to use/carry my 7D or 5D2, I bought a second hand 400D over a new or even second hand 1000D.


----------



## AAPhotog (Jul 16, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> D_Rochat said:
> 
> 
> > The mods are deleting posts and issuing warnings......
> ...


thanks for the clarification. Wonder why I'm a troll for my original comment rofl


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 16, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Back on track. Like others have mentioned, I think this is a solid upgrade for people using the 60D or lower and are wanting to get into a FF. Not really an upgrade for the 5DII users, but it's not meant to be.



Another point to mention is that the additional plastic would be to minimize cost. Even though newer cameras are surpassing the 5DII, the cost to manufacture a 5DII is not going down. 2000-2200 might be the floor where making the 5DII is profitable or not. If it comes out now with 5DIIs still in the retail channels, then it might not be an obvious win. But how about in a year or two when the 5DII is out of production, and the price for this drops to 1600-1700? That would lower the price of entry to the FF club, which is a win for a lot of people.


----------



## pakosouthpark (Jul 16, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> Another point to mention is that the additional plastic would be to minimize cost. Even though newer cameras are surpassing the 5DII, the cost to manufacture a 5DII is not going down. 2000-2200 might be the floor where making the 5DII is profitable or not. If it comes out now with 5DIIs still in the retail channels, then it might not be an obvious win. But how about in a year or two when the 5DII is out of production, and the price for this drops to 1600-1700? That would lower the price of entry to the FF club, which is a win for a lot of people.



but then d600 is better specs, probably plastic build as well but CHEAPER!


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 16, 2012)

This will be my next camera as long as its sub 2000$. 19 crops type AF points like the 7D is more than enough for me.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 16, 2012)

pakosouthpark said:


> but then d600 is better specs, probably plastic build as well but CHEAPER!



I would wait until we see back to back tests before jumping to conclusions


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

I wonder what they'll call it.

A single-digit name is dictated by the build, not the sensor size, in which case this body would break with tradition if it were called, say, a 6D. But if not a single-digit name, then what could it be called?


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 16, 2012)

AdamJ said:


> I wonder what they'll call it.
> 
> A single-digit name is dictated by the build, not the sensor size, in which case this body would break with tradition if it were called, say, a 6D. But if not a single-digit name, then what could it be called?



How about the 5D mark II N?


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Jul 16, 2012)

Alumina said:


> Canon-F1 said:
> 
> 
> > the D600 seems to be BIT FOR BIT the better camera and the better deal.
> ...




Exactly. This just seems like a bad idea (and a bad year) all around for Canon. Why would anyone buy this camera when they could have a weather sealed 5D Mark II or possibly the new Nikon D600. It just seems like Canon is just sleeping through 2012.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

Radiating said:


> this is a combination of a series of exposures using a method developed in consultation with the Cambridge Signal Processing Lab. I do consulting for a few camera review websites to develop testing methods and put this together for a project



DxO?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 16, 2012)

I apologize for my post. 

Brett


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 16, 2012)

DarkKnightNine said:


> Why would anyone buy this camera when they could have a weather sealed 5D Mark II...



I'd assume that Canon will discontinue selling new 5DII's at the time they release this new camera (assuming they do release it). Then it becomes the obviuos choice, unless one is willing to buy used. But wait, you say, many retailers will still have 5DII stock... Perhaps, just as many have the now-discontinued 24-70L in stock...and are charging an arm and a leg for it.


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

AdamJ said:


> I wonder what they'll call it.
> 
> A single-digit name is dictated by the build, not the sensor size, in which case this body would break with tradition if it were called, say, a 6D. But if not a single-digit name, then what could it be called?



They should call it 9-and-3/4-D (like in Harry Potter), its close to 10D but not a 10D :-D

...anyway, if 22 mpx sensor, ISO 100-25600 (dont need 51600 native) and 19 points AF comes true then Im fully in !  I want to buy FF, can hold off with purchase (Ive started looking at Mk II because Mk III price is too much) - AF improvment will be welcome. Maybe Canon will re-use 1D-X sensor and cripple it down a bit (in terms of some native ISO limit or so).


But I wonder what "compatible with STM lenses" means - I doubt that there will be new FF sensor with phace detection...forgive me if Im too sceptic.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

DarkKnightNine said:


> Alumina said:
> 
> 
> > Canon-F1 said:
> ...



did you not read what others wrote?

canon is doing the perfect thing!
this new camera is a perfect. 
it´s way better then the D600 (ok if not then it´s at least a canon and you can use your L glas).


don´t write such stuff or you get labeld an amateur with no experience....


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 16, 2012)

lonelywhitelights said:


> I've used both 5DII and 5DIII in the studio and within a studio environment I can find literally NO difference in the cameras, the upgraded AF system is useless since I shoot manual focus 99% of the time and the 5DII AF , however ancient, is still perfectly adequate. This is why I have not upgraded to 5DIII - it's almost a pointless upgrade for studio shooters - definitely pointless given the price AND the fact that the 5DII gives identical results. Currently, if I were to upgrade, the only way to go is medium format but still the 5DII is going to be a workhorse for a few more years I think - It's a bloody fantastic camera.


If you do not use the additional capability of the 5D MK III, you will see little difference, if any. A Brownie 620 film Box Camera at f/8 will work just as well in a studio as a 35mm SLR.
Its only those who want the extra performance that will find the 5D MK III useful.

As to the sensor, you only need take a dark frame from each and boost it 3 EV in processing to see the difference.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> As to the sensor, you only need take a dark frame from each and boost it 3 EV in processing to see the difference.



but then you should include the new sony sensor in the D800 also. 

i still see some issues with the 5D MK3 sensor, cross-hatch banding, they have not 100% fixed.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 16, 2012)

unfocused said:


> Am I good or what? Exactly what I've been predicting for months now. You can expect the 70D to have pretty much the same specs, with an APS-C sensor.
> 
> 7DII will be essentially the 5DIII with an APS-C sensor. It's all perfectly logical and predictable.
> 
> ...



.

Yep, yep, yep. "...perfectly logical and predictable" -- when you understand marketing. The marketplace is their sandbox; you step into it, you use the toys they put there. If you like the toys in the other corner better, so be it -- they'll change their toys if it gets too unbalanced. Good to remember they're the only ones who really know where that tipping point is.

The most fascinating thing for me is Canon seems to have drawn a line, somewhere around $2500 USD. Below that is the real "mass market," so to speak. Above it are businesses (who can write off higher priced items) and the overstuffed wallets with more money than brains. Really makes me wonder where they price the 7D2 when it comes out. Makes me think they won't break the barrier, so somewhere around $2499 USD. I hope we get to see sooner rather than later.

Oh, and as for terminating posts and posters, a word to the you know who. There's a strong Judeo-Christian bias in that neighborhood; something as innocuous as the "F" word will get you terminated here in the gentleman's club.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 16, 2012)

Umm.... I would be really suprised when one would choose Canon New Entry Level over Nikon D600 (as if reported specs of both cameras are correct) even if at the same price. There is one exception is that that person has too many Canon lens (ooopsss).

Another thing that I guess D600 will probably be better in term of noise (if D600 matches D800 noise reduction design, but not the sharpness) since number of megapixels is way smaller (try to study pixel pitch/signal to noise ratio if one would like to understand more about this area.)

My conclusion is that if Canon wants to maintain their customers and draw more Canon customers, it must slighty beat Nikon in both ways, or at least stay within the same area of price and specs (must be aware of the powerful of social network in this century, not loosing one or two like in the past, but bunch...)

-- My 2 Cents


----------



## munzzzzzzz (Jul 16, 2012)

Long time reader here, first time poster...

I'm excited about this announcement, but for a different reason than most others. I tend to buy used bodies, and this should presumably push the price of used 5DMkII's even lower. I've been hemming and hawing about picking up a 5Dc, but now I think I'll just wait until it comes out and hopefully the 5DMkII drops down well below $1500. For me, the MkII is fully adequate, I just can't quite justify the cost yet for my hobbyist needs.


----------



## stipotle (Jul 16, 2012)

I'm disappointed to hear this is the likely entry level FF. 
I understand how this camera would "fit in" nicely and would provide a great upgrade for many different kinds of canon users, but it really doesn't seem like much of an upgrade to me. 

I always saw the 5Dc and 5DmkII as latest and greatest sensors fit into the most affordable package Canon could make. While the 5DmkIII sensor is obviously better performing, by all accounts it's just improved efficiency, aimed at jpg improvement, and rather incremental after 4 years. 
("Marketecture" ... lol that's great)

In this rumor I see a cheaper body and possibly fewer professional features in exchange for a better (4 year old) AF and little better sensor as a TRADE OFF, not an improvement (especially if no big price reduction from the mkII). 
And after 4 years, to offer trade-offs instead of good tech improvement is kind of BS and not at all exciting. (An improvement to me would have been the low light 18mp 1DX sensor in a cheap body, or -while I personally don't want it- High MP in a cheap body, or the new 61pt AF in a cheap body, etc)

I get it, defend it as a great camera, and sure they are all great cameras blah blah blah, but most tech companies can't get away with such little advancement in almost half a decade's time. 
(It reminds me of Apple's lack of improvement with the Mac Pro in the last few years and look how PISSED people are about that.) I guess it's just the principle of it and I don't see how more people _aren't_ disappointed. 

So, oh well. It is what it is (and if IS not as impressive as what Nikon is trying to do). 
But also if true, it makes the Mark II truly a great Canon buy and those who bought it in December last year happy happy people


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> Umm.... I would be really suprised when one would choose Canon New Entry Level over Nikon D600 (as if reported specs of both cameras are correct) even if at the same price. There is one exception is that that person has too many Canon lens (ooopsss).



if a newbie wants to buy into the DSLR world and asks me what to buy .. and the specs are true.. my unbiased advice.. -> buy the D600.

sorry canon... but on paper the D600 looks better.


----------



## TAF (Jul 16, 2012)

It sounds more or less like Canon is planning on packaging the 5D3 electronics into a Rebel body - which is exactly what I would like to buy.

I bought the 5D3, and am throughly enjoying using it, but is rather heavy. I would be delighted to have a body that weighs like my Xt but with the capabilities of the 5D3. I'm fine with plastics (it's all in how they're used), and the extra weather sealing of the more expensive camera is not really necessary for my uses. I would give up the 61 pt AF in a heartbeat - it is really unnecessary, and not very well designed in my opinion - but I would want to keep the very high ISO (the primary reason I bought the 5D3), auto iso, and some of the other new features.

A $2K price point would have meant more glass in the bag...if only it had come out 3 month ago!


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jul 16, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> I can't wait for such a camera…
> Why? Because my wife started using my 5dmk3, she fell in love with it and no longer loves her 60D….and i can't afford to buy another 5D  So…this would fit her just nice! And my wallet too..hehe



Giver her your 5d3 and you can use her 60d, problem solved.


----------



## AJ (Jul 16, 2012)

I'm very excited by the news, happy that it's CR2 and not just a wild rumor. 

- I'm excited about a plastic body. I'm a traveler and hiker, and every gram counts.
- Same price as 5D2, but it'll have vastly better AF, a newer sensor, and it'll have digic5.
- If the price starts at $2k at launch, it'll only go downward from there on

I wonder if the new lens will be 28-135/3.5-5.6 mk2 STM?

This might just be the camera that'll have me switch from crop to FF. But then I'll have to buy new UWA and fisheye lenses :-\


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

AJ said:


> I'm very excited by the news, happy that it's CR2 and not just a wild rumor.
> 
> - I'm excited about a plastic body. I'm a traveler and hiker, and every gram counts.
> - Same price as 5D2, but it'll have vastly better AF, a newer sensor, and it'll have digic5.
> ...



Another enthusiastic target buyer. Perhaps Canon have got it right.


----------



## syder (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> Trovador said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.
> ...



So you're happy to accept that the 5Dm3 is better for people who shoot video
...and for those who shoot weddings
...and those who shoot events
...and those who shoot sports
...and of course anyone who does any of the above and studio or landscape work

The main complaints about the 5Dm2 were around AF and FPS, not image quality, and these things have been improved. To be honest the 5Dm3 isn't the world's greatest studio camera, and it clearly hasn't been designed to be a specialist studio/landscape camera... 

...Maybe wait for the Canon big megapixel camera? It sounds like it'll offer you the upgrade you clearly think you need. And if you can't wait for it then buy a D800 or go MF both will do what you do better than a 5Dm3. However, for most studio needs that 5Dm2 was fine. The 5dm3 isn't any worse, and it adds a lot in other areas. If those other areas don't interest you then fine, just accept that it isn't the right tool for you and get on with your life.


----------



## darrellrhodesmiller (Jul 16, 2012)

i really like the idea of a smaller lighter full frame, i dont need 9 fps.. or 60 focusing points. what i do need is the low light performance and the high ISO performance of the 5d mk III. 

i know this wont be a perfect camera, but i'm really looking forward to seeing what really comes out and the performance of it. Nikon is really pushing Canon in good new ways. competition is a good thing. 

D


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

syder said:


> So you're happy to accept that the 5Dm3 is better for people who shoot video
> ...and for those who shoot weddings
> ...and those who shoot events
> ...and those who shoot sports
> ...and of course anyone who does any of the above and studio or landscape work



he wrote: *and you have to understand the different needs.*

i mean it´s pretty clear that he accepts that, or not?



> And if you can't wait for it then buy a D800 or go MF both will do what you do better than a 5Dm3.



i think many here have put a lot of money in a CANON SYSTEM.
so we ask canon to deliver.... not nikon.

and i think it is only human that we want the best, not only _good enough_.
competition is in our DNA.. olympics 2012? 




> The 5dm3 isn't any worse, and it adds a lot in other areas. If those other areas don't interest you then fine, just accept that it isn't the right tool for you and get on with your life.






astro said:


> but we are individuals here, with individual needs



looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion. :


----------



## Marine03 (Jul 16, 2012)

I to am excited in some ways by this camera. 

1st. upgrading to FF from my 450D I dream over the possibilities of low light photography and stunning images. 
2. I have done several events like weddings this year with the 450D as a second shooter, about $400 worth so far for the year and $3500 is never going to be in my budget with a new family. $2000 kit or less with just body however would be a possibility. 
3. 19PT AF would be great for the occasional sports shots, I'm a center point type of guy most the time. 
4. I'm not afraid of plastic bodies, 4 years of 450D use and I haven't broken it yet. Maybe every 5D owner uses it to drive nails?
5. FPS, 4? ehhhhh I guess that's is tolerable, I normally don't need more than my 3.2 I currently have but wish I had 6FPS some days, which I doubt would happen with the 5D3 being 6, but how about 5?
6. Built in flash can be handy especially if its a trigger. 

ooo and please don't totally cripple it with like a 5 shot buffer.


----------



## DJL329 (Jul 16, 2012)

Will a plastic body mean they _could_ add GPS? (If I remember correctly, the magnesium body is the reason that Canon states the 5D II and III can't have in-camera GPS.)

As for a new, non-L kit lens, could it be the long-awaited 50mm f/1.4 USM II -or- a 50mm f/1.4 STM?


----------



## 7enderbender (Jul 16, 2012)

Radiating said:


> 7enderbender said:
> 
> 
> > How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?
> ...




Look, that's all fine and maybe I should have said "noticeable difference for all practical purposes" or something to that extent. Clearly the 5DIII is a positive development on many levels. I wouldn't mind having one. And I can see that there are applications and user types who need exactly those improvements.

All I'm saying is that to me personally I see no reason to sell my MarkII and shell out a significant amount of money to upgrade. Hi ISO stuff, AF, and all the other improvements are not important enough for me and I have yet to see a real life photo where any one would say, wow, this was shot with camera A, B or C. They are all very very good, no doubt. None is "perfect".

So everyone needs to balance features, little quirks and cost of course. I personally would want a smaller, more plasticky camera for the minuscule improvement in the sensor functions that at least for my real-life applications wouldn't make any difference. Honestly, the 5DII is small and plasticky enough as it is. I actually added the battery grip to add some weight for balancing things according to what I'm used to and prefer.

And as I said, the biggest selling point for a 5DIII or 1DX would be its compatibility with the new flash system. But that adds even a LOT more money.

Considerations for people with other priorities or people new to a system may look entirely different and I'm not saying that's not valid. I'm just struggling with the above rumored features for that kind of money. 2k is hardly "entry level".


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 16, 2012)

AdamJ said:


> AJ said:
> 
> 
> > I'm very excited by the news, happy that it's CR2 and not just a wild rumor.
> ...



I agreed. 

FF sensor + 19points AF = enough for enthusiastic shooter to jump from crop to FF.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 16, 2012)

distant.star said:


> Oh, and as for terminating posts and posters, a word to the you know who. There's a strong Judeo-Christian bias in that neighborhood; something as innocuous as the "F" word will get you terminated here in the gentleman's club.



Seriously? You're going to make it a religious issue to act cordially and try to use an above 7th grade vocabulary? Maybe we should try to stick to discussing cameras and photography.


----------



## D_Rochat (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion. :



No. Having an opinion and excessive complaining about the same thing are two different things. I also seem to recall him getting nasty with Brian for voicing HIS opinion. : :


----------



## daniemare (Jul 16, 2012)

Astro said:


> Trovador said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.
> ...



Ever thought that it might not be for people like you but people like me with Rebels and 60D's to upgrade to.
And I can just assume - there is a lot of us


----------



## D_Rochat (Jul 16, 2012)

DJL329 said:


> Will a plastic body mean they _could_ add GPS? (If I remember correctly, the magnesium body is the reason that Canon states the 5D II and III can't have in-camera GPS.)



I don't know about the magnesium body, but having a built in GPS could backfire for some working Pros who shoot in sensitive areas where GPS is prohibited. For that reason, I doubt we'll ever see built in GPS in DSLRs. That and the GPS accessory is a money maker.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> ishdakuteb said:
> 
> 
> > Umm.... I would be really suprised when one would choose Canon New Entry Level over Nikon D600 (as if reported specs of both cameras are correct) even if at the same price. There is one exception is that that person has too many Canon lens (ooopsss).
> ...



@Canon F1: Kudo to your suggestion Canon F1! You are absolutely correct. I would suggest the same thing as if they would like to go with Canon. However, as if Canon don't pay really close to voices from their customers, I bet that they would lose theirs... There are many lessons out there to take a look at (Sony TV vs. Samsung, Nokia vs. Samsung and Apple, etc). Didn't those company lose number of customers with same kinda reasons?

I guess that Canon needs to keep in mind that there is no such a DSLR newbie knowing why they are needing a full frame camera (For example, how many newbie knows how to shoot a picture in low light situation or dynamic range situation i.e. in a under shade of tress and sun? like cherry farm at high noon with a windy day


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 16, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> AdamJ said:
> 
> 
> > AJ said:
> ...



awww hell, the 5d2 AF was so terrible I would have gotten the 5d3 even if it only had the 19 pt 7d AF system... the 61pt system now is just gravy to me. Horses for courses, a 5d2 shooter not wanting to shell out $3500 for the 5d3, and get improved AF again, more high ISO, better sensor and technology... all for under $2000 (supposedly)... to me that's a no-brainer, but what do I know.


----------



## daniemare (Jul 16, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > AdamJ said:
> ...



I am also one of those target buyers very excited about this.

I was just wondering, back in Feb 2012 when I wrote a post about the cost of FF and suggested that there is space on the market for a 70D like body (60D + Digic 5), 7D AF and a FF sensor, many commented that you couldn't just drop that 7D AF in over a FF sensor. It seems that this is exactly what will happen. So do they need to change anything or not?


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 16, 2012)

darrellrhodesmiller said:


> i really like the idea of a smaller lighter full frame, i dont need 9 fps.. or 60 focusing points. what i do need is the low light performance and the high ISO performance of the 5d mk III.
> 
> i know this wont be a perfect camera, but i'm really looking forward to seeing what really comes out and the performance of it. Nikon is really pushing Canon in good new ways. competition is a good thing.
> 
> D



From what you are saying, I am not sure why you need a full frame? Just currious... Want a real focal range?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 16, 2012)

meli said:


> It does sound like a repackaged 5d2. The probability of inheriting 7D's AF sounds promising and the package might come awfully close to mark3 for 1.5k less; perhaps some features chopping is due.
> 
> on another note, i seriously wonder about Canon's product planners abilities. 5years ago they were alone in the game and now they're being dragged around. Suddenly Canon who was in the frontier of FF finds itself stalling with cameras between 18 & 22mp and the competition ( that 5 yrs ago didnt even had FF) has models spanning from 12 to 36mp



That's why I (and a few others) started to raise havoc on the forums 3-4 years ago. It was all easy enough to see. But most said we were trolls spouting nonsense and that Canon would always easily be far ahead of Nikon....


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 16, 2012)

Orion said:


> I can't believe how this is actually being taken as a serious option FOR ANYBODY. Over $2000 with taxes . . if you are a serious photographer, then get a mkIII and mean it. The laod of crap they saturate tyhe market witrh these days is amazing . . . thanks to the sheep out there. And thank god for plastic, and $2000 FF cameras too . . . profit grab, nothing else. So, I guess the 5DmkII will be around $1000 now.



$1500 extra is still a lot to many people

the main problem is not so much this camera but the rumored D600 which might have a much better sensor and an important extra fps and perhaps better AF for perhaps same price


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 16, 2012)

AAPhotog said:


> Basically the only difference between the 5d2 and 5d3 is the AF and thats worth $1500 in that case. but this AF UPGRADE isn't worth the same price? Im lost. and this is coming from a 5d3 owner.



no moire and 1.5-2 stops better SNR for video and a critical 2 extra fps and faster shutter response and no banding at very high iso are pretty big items too though, in addition to the AF (not a fan of the new VF though, easy replaceable screens would've meant more to me) oh and it's not super huge but it seems to do a solid 1/2+ better SNR

(granted it was sad they STILL crippled autoiso and they crippled video by not giving it crop modes, zebra stripes and focus peaking, ridiculous petty games by canon marketing and the dynamic range at lower ISO to actually become a trace worse when Nikon gets like 3+ stops better.....)

(and other nice ones, not that they really cost anything (other than perhaps the build): C1-C3 can now auto-update (really nice), dedicated video toggle switch, instant jump to exact 100% percent review, quick in field rating, audio meters, outline around histogram, nicer screen, less flimsy build, dual MFA for zooms (next they need to add near, mid and far distance settings perhaps), mostly they don't really add anything to Canon's cost and some could even be put on the 5D2 with a new firmware, but whatever, they do all make it more usable in the field absolutely for sure)


----------



## RC (Jul 16, 2012)

The more I think about this rumor, this could could work out very nicely for me assuming the specs are within my needs. This might just be the perfect camera for those in my shoes or on a limited budget. (Obviously if funds were unlimited I would already have a 5D3.)

Since I have a 7D and plan to keep it and get a FF in addition, I will have the reach and FPS with the 7D when I need it.

A FF (I'll call it a 6D) will be my landscape, portrait, and low light body. Assuming the specs are at least these:
- same (or better) sensor than the 5DII
- 7D or better AF
- AFMA
- form factor no smaller than the 7D
- 100% view finder
- prefer metal body (may compromise)
- weather sealing (at least that of 7D)
- swivel screen--don't want
- pop up flash--don't want unless its a radio trigger

All my lens are EF Ls so everything is line.

If this doesn't work out then I'm back to looking at a 5D2 or 5D3--but a 5D3 has to come down or I'll have to go used.

Sorry, I know, this is an extension off a previous post, just optimistic that this might be my solution.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Canon-F1 said:
> 
> 
> > looks like he has accepted that already but some here won´t let him have his own opinion. :
> ...



well his opinion is that everyone should stop posting about nikon here.




> I have no problem with people moving to Nikon. However I do think that the constant putting down of Canon to justify moving to Nikon with so called 'facts' to justify their move is not appropriate on a Canon Rumours forum. I dont logon to this forum to join in with speculation/rumours about Nikon kit.





> This site is for users interested in Canon equipment, not for people to spread the word about how good Nikon a camera in comparison to Canon's camera - especially one that is only rumoured.





> I think in this case the best option would have been to post this thread on a more general photographic forum





> If I want to read about Nikon I go to Nikon Rumours. I dont come to Canon Rumours to listen to the Nikon Fanboys tell me what a poor job Canon are doing.





> Well there are two trolls who have come out of the closet. Go back to NR lads



and so on.. lots more posted in the third party forum that is exactly made for such discussions. :

you were talking about "excessive complaining" ?


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Jul 16, 2012)

MacDarcy said:


> Is that $1,999 for the camera AND the kit lens? Or just the body?
> 
> Cause if it's for the camera AND the kit lens....I am soooooo buying one. $1,499 would be sweet for a entry level full frame.


I doubt they would include a $500 lens with this camera. More like $200....


----------



## crasher8 (Jul 16, 2012)

Oh I see…..I'm not a 'serious' photographer unless I go into 'serious' debt! 

The 2k price point is perfect and not one being used by Canon at the moment. You have a big jump from the 7D to a 5D mk2 and let's not get into the size of the jump from a 7D to a mk3. Once again, some of us have budgets. I for one am liking the specs. Not loving but liking.


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Orion said:
> 
> 
> > I can't believe how this is actually being taken as a serious option FOR ANYBODY. Over $2000 with taxes . . if you are a serious photographer, then get a mkIII and mean it. The laod of crap they saturate tyhe market witrh these days is amazing . . . thanks to the sheep out there. And thank god for plastic, and $2000 FF cameras too . . . profit grab, nothing else. So, I guess the 5DmkII will be around $1000 now.
> ...



...my main questions are:

Does majority of users need those extra features ?
Are they gonna use every single AF point ?
Is 19 point AF from 7D that crappy that it wont take along with Nikon AF ?
Isnt 7D AF 19 cross-type ? Rumored D600 is 9 cross type points...

My *personal* thoughts:
1.) 22mpx is far enough for most of people
2.) Rumored Nikon AF: 39 AF points (with an option of 11 AF points), 9 cross-type AF points - if Canon will fit 7D-like AF there could be 19 cross-type points. I prefer 19 point that are working just right. I havent heard of Nikon AF options if there is this cluster type - but its a great feature.
3.) Most of Rebel/xxD have used close to 5 fps - so 4 seams reasonable. And it wont cut into 5D Mk III sales.
4.) Most of peoble upgrading to FF want low-light performance and DoF - not high FPS speed. I think that combo of 7D and this "rumored" camera will make a nice kit. If you want allaround camera - you can just buy 5D Mk III - seems pretty clear to me. Would be nice if this new camera will use the same battery as 7D.

...so there would be: 5D/6D/9D/whateverD - entry FF, 5D Mk III advanced FF, rumored 5D-X - high mpx body and 1D-X - pro FF sports body. Plenty of options to choose and fit your needs.

*Do not expect 36 Mpx, 61 point AF, 10 fps, ISO 100-51200 native for 1500 USD.*

If you dont have cash for upgrade right now - save for it - or buy used.

...and bottom line: *high-speced body doesnt make better photographer*  It is always about the way you see it and how you can use you _*current*_ equipment.


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 16, 2012)

mathino said:


> ...my main questions are:
> 
> Does majority of users need those extra features ?
> Are they gonna use every single AF point ?
> ...



It's up to the individual user how many if any of the points will be used... Up until the 5d3/1dx came out, the 7d was regarded to have the second best AF system in Canon's line-up. It's not a crappy system, but takes some learning curve to master, as did many 5d3 users learned when they switched from the 5d2 to the 5d3. And yes, all 19 points for the 7d are all cross type. As for your thoughts/opinions, I think your right on for the most part.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

> Does majority of users need those extra features ?



great and why don´t we just all buy a used 5D... i think it´s good enough for most here.



that is NO real argument.. no matter how often it is repeated.

i think i don´t need most of the new features the 5D MK3 offers... not for the price tag.
that is why i stick to my 5D MK2 for a while.

but if canon wants my money they have to give me more for my money.
more then this new entry level FF camera. that´s all im saying


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> Oh I see…..I'm not a 'serious' photographer unless I go into 'serious' debt!
> 
> The 2k price point is perfect and not one being used by Canon at the moment. You have a big jump from the 7D to a 5D mk2 and let's not get into the size of the jump from a 7D to a mk3. Once again, some of us have budgets. I for one am liking the specs. Not loving but liking.



You can be a more-or-less serious photographer with any camera. Camera type/line is not a measurment of seriousness (my opinion).

...I think that 2k price rage is a good one. As Ive written in my longer post - everything depends on persons needs. If you want both speed and low-light performance - you can choose for 2 bodies (7D and 5D Mk II) = which roughly equals to price of 5D Mk III that is (I think) all around camera.

Im not a sports shooter so I would choose this rumored body if it comes true. 5D Mk III is far beyond my reach as an amateur and this would be a perfect camera for my needs


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 16, 2012)

daniemare said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



I vaguely remember a question like yours a few months ago... The 19 Points may need to be spread out as they were designed for the 7d sensor/mirror/assembly... A full frame sensor is bigger and so if kept the same, it would be very clustered... perhaps even more so than the current 5d2 cluster... But in theory, they could keep the same overall design of the 7d system, spread out the points to be proportional or at least close, and call it good.


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> mathino said:
> 
> 
> > ...my main questions are:
> ...



I agree  Its individual decision. Ive had an opportunity to borrow my friends 7D and I think its great. Sure, it takes some time to master and learn how to use it to get the best results - but it happens every time when something new comes out. Some of people master new tech (and also learn its usage and limitations), some will still complain its not enough - they will never be happy


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> > Does majority of users need those extra features ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I see your point  Im writing this as a Rebel user so this is why I stated it. Sure, if I would be a 5D Mk II user then this camera would not gain my interest (after seeing rumored specs). I would want something better with new stuff not just upgraded AF with platic-only body.

...and yes, I would like to have 5D Mk III, but as an ethusiast its way too pricy and I know I wont use it to that extend to pay for extra stuff.


----------



## DanielW (Jul 16, 2012)

RC said:


> The more I think about this rumor, this could could work out very nicely for me assuming the specs are within my needs. This might just be the perfect camera for those in my shoes or on a limited budget. (Obviously if funds were unlimited I would already have a 5D3.)
> 
> Since I have a 7D and plan to keep it and get a FF in addition, I will have the reach and FPS with the 7D when I need it.
> 
> ...



Why is a pop-up flash a bad thing?


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

DanielW said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > The more I think about this rumor, this could could work out very nicely for me assuming the specs are within my needs. This might just be the perfect camera for those in my shoes or on a limited budget. (Obviously if funds were unlimited I would already have a 5D3.)
> ...



If they manage to fit in a large enough bright prism then not. But personally, I wont use it much. I would rather use my 430 EX II.

Control over wireless flashes would be a welcome feature but I doubt there will be such feature in it.


----------



## stipotle (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> D_Rochat said:
> 
> 
> > Canon-F1 said:
> ...



Hah, +1000


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

mathino said:


> Control over wireless flashes would be a welcome feature but I doubt there will be such feature in it.



Even Rebels have that.


----------



## DanielW (Jul 16, 2012)

mathino said:


> DanielW said:
> 
> 
> > RC said:
> ...



Oh, now I see it. Things can get crowded up there...
Nikon seems to have no problem with it on their D800; hopefully Canon will find a way too, as currently I only have one flash...


----------



## Ricku (Jul 16, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> To all complaining about no new sensor... do you really expect canon to put a BETTER sensor and an IMPROVED sensor in a camera BELOW it's beloved 5d3? Really?


Well, Canon still don't have a sensor that can compete with Nikon's D800 sensor. Their beloved 5D3 (a.k.a 5D2.5) certainly failed at that.

So yeah, they should make and launch a better sensor as soon as posible.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

Ricku said:


> So yeah, they should make and launch a better sensor as soon as posible.




for me this is like back then when microsoft released VISTA.. just wait for win7.


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

AdamJ said:


> mathino said:
> 
> 
> > Control over wireless flashes would be a welcome feature but I doubt there will be such feature in it.
> ...



I think many of its possible future users would be glad for that feature  I would, from certain point of view. It was just my opinion...

As my main wireless flash triggers Im using Pixel Kings - radio is radio.

...if they would include their RT system as build-in - THAT I would call a welcome feature


----------



## kdw75 (Jul 16, 2012)

I like all the rumored specs, but it needs to be at least the size and build quality of the 7D. Then it would be worth about $1899.

The way it is rumored to be the price needs to be down around $1299.

When you are paying that much a magnesium body that is somewhat weather sealed is expected.


----------



## Stewbyyy (Jul 16, 2012)

This is exactly what I've been hoping for pretty much. I saw people saying that Canon would probably make this a Rebel body which would completely put me off buying it.

I wouldn't have a problem if the body was similar to my 60D (but without the stupid articulating screen). I've wanted to make the jump to full frame for about 6 months now but as a gig photographer I just don't think the 5D II would be that great for me, I couldn't live with the centre AF point only. This camera would be near perfect.


----------



## funkboy (Jul 16, 2012)

Sounds like...

a 5D mkII!

(except for the "smaller than 5D mkII bit


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

The rumored specs have me a bit confused...

For $2000 you get:

22mp 5D3 sensor?

19 point AF - Ok, this sounds reasonable.

4fps - Makes sense.

ISO 100-51200 - Taking into consideration that this camera will have a 5D3 sensor; wouldn't this mean that ISO performance at ISO 51200 would be the same as 5D3? Canon just eliminated ISO 102400... but 102400 is unusable anyway... Logic tells me that this new entry level FF camera will not perform the same as a 5D3... but then that would mean that Canon just de-tuned the heck out of the 5D3 sensor and it's capabilities... Lose money lol

3"LCD - Ok

Smaller than 5D Mark II - If it's smaller, than does this mean that there is no quick reference display on the top of the body? Or does this simply mean that it may be "slightly" smaller than a 5D2? Maybe the size of a 60D? In which case, it being the size of a 60D is pretty irrelevant information since it's not that much smaller than a 5D2...

More plastic than metal in the construction - So this camera will be packed with what sounds like great performance features but will be built like a toy?

Pop-up flash - Ok

$1999 USD at launch - Ok

Launched with new non-L full frame kit lens - Whatever

Compatible with full frame STM lenses - Whatever

So in a nutshell, for $1500 less than a 5D Mark 3 you get the same sensor and ISO performance (up to ISO 51200), a crappier AF system, and 2fps less continuous shooting speed, but have to live with the thing being built like a toy... On that note, for $100-$200 less than a 5D Mark 2 you get a way better sensor, ISO performance, AF system, and 1fps more continuous shooting speed, but have to live with the thing being built like a toy because even the 5D Mark II was mostly metal in construction. Does anyone else think these specs don't seem realistic?


----------



## mathino (Jul 16, 2012)

kdw75 said:


> I like all the rumored specs, but it needs to be at least the size and build quality of the 7D. Then it would be worth about $1899.
> 
> The way it is rumored to be the price needs to be down around $1299.
> 
> When you are paying that much a magnesium body that is somewhat weather sealed is expected.



Forgive me if Im wrong but isnt 7D more weather-sealed as 5D Mk II ? Both of them have magnesium alloy chassis.

5D Mk II seals:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Images/seals.jpg

7D seals:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS7D/Images/sealing.jpg

If they make it same as 7D body it would be actualy close to 5D Mk III sealing.

Its just a rumor, price is rumored...as the rugedness/build and sealing is


----------



## Bosman (Jul 16, 2012)

tron said:


> 7enderbender said:
> 
> 
> > How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?
> ...


Haha, and a real focus system as opposed to the 5d1 & 5d2. Its already an upgrade for the same price. Sure its not a metal body. Metal bodies don't make my shots turn out better and in focus, focus systems do. Also a popup flash to trigger the RF flashes, and when doing pj and you actually need a little fill flash but don't have a full size flash, how can you go wrong? As far as weather sealing, just don't use this one in the rain, you don't need two bodies to shoot when the weather is bad. Why would the AA filter be stronger, they have minimized it? I own a 5dm3 and i don't think its a joke but we'll see what the specs are.


----------



## RC (Jul 16, 2012)

DanielW said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...





mathino said:


> If they manage to fit in a large enough bright prism then not. But personally, I wont use it much. I would rather use my 430 EX II.
> 
> Control over wireless flashes would be a welcome feature but I doubt there will be such feature in it.



Dido


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 16, 2012)

> If I want to read about Nikon I go to Nikon Rumours. I dont come to Canon Rumours to listen to the Nikon Fanboys tell me what a poor job Canon are doing.



This is totally wrong, as least my point of view. As if I am a Nikon owner(s), I would want my employees go to Canon users' forums or find any resources and to search for Canon weakness to its customers. Welcome to correct me as if I am wrong...


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> The rumored specs have me a bit confused...
> 
> For $2000 you get:
> 
> ...



until here it´s ok.. but then it´s nonsense.. try to break such a "toy" camera.
i have abused my cheap 550D in every way except droping/exposing it into water.

i can tell you it´s hard to break such a "toy". 

my 5D MK2 sure feels better.. but i have NO reservation to abuse my 550D under hard conditions. i dropped it a few times. thank god with no lens attached.

if it does not drop onto the LCD (and that would kill a 5D MK3 display too) you can drop it from 3m above without a problem.

all that will happen is that maybe the pop up flash will come out and a few scratches.


----------



## goodmane (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > So yeah, they should make and launch a better sensor as soon as posible.
> ...



For me this is like when lots of people bought macs instead of waiting for win 7. I don't care about canon and nikon anymore. I'd quite like to swap my 5dc for this camera if its cheap enough, especially if it has built in flash so I can take it out of the house without my studio lights, but what I really want is built in wifi for transferring images to my network. If my android phone can do it and fit in my pocket and hulking great dslr should be able to do it without an enormous attachment that costs an extra few hundred $.


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 16, 2012)

Ricku said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > To all complaining about no new sensor... do you really expect canon to put a BETTER sensor and an IMPROVED sensor in a camera BELOW it's beloved 5d3? Really?
> ...



Depends on how you view things... I shoot professionally, and while the D800 DR is great at low ISO, at ISO 800 and beyond is canon's territory and frankly, daytime shots, the only time I'd be able to really take advantage of low iso DR, most of it would be washed away when I increase contrast as D800 shots tend to be muddy... I'm not taking anything away from what Nikon has produced, it's a very good and very impressive camera, but in no way is the 5d3 inferior or a bad sensor... I'm sure there are those product and or landscape photogs chomping at the bit for a much improved sensor, but in the end, either camera will satisfy 95% of all photogs... If you feel canon failed, that's your opinion... But it is, as a camera, an awesome tool.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > More plastic than metal in the construction - So this camera will be packed with what sounds like great performance features but will be built like a toy?
> ...



+1. I have an Xti and a 40D, and although obviously not as sturdy as my 7D, I certainly never felt like they were toys. And feelings aside, they keep trucking right along even though I'm fairly abusive of my gear.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> The rumored specs have me a bit confused...
> 
> For $2000 you get:
> 
> ...




ahaha... love you comments. it is so true... (built like a toy).


----------



## PhotoCharlie (Jul 16, 2012)

distant.star said:


> Oh, and as for terminating posts and posters, a word to the you know who. There's a strong Judeo-Christian bias in that neighborhood; something as innocuous as the "F" word will get you terminated here in the gentleman's club.



One of the elements I have appreciated about canonrumors forums is the generally cordial attitude and posts. If the Moderator has to pull a few comments to keep it that way then so be it. Censorship only occurs when people can't censor nor control themselves. I really can't stand to spend much time on NikonRumors because of the frequent F bombs, name calling and general uncivil attitude. Thanks CanonRumors for a better environment.


----------



## Bosman (Jul 16, 2012)

If there is plastic and it is smaller than the 5dm3 then if it was in a 7d body it would be smaller and as for the plastic, a pop-up flash would be plastic, probably nothing else.


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > The rumored specs have me a bit confused...
> ...



I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> ahaha... love you comments. it is so true... (built like a toy).



ishdakuteb, please stop trolling.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

the one thing is weather sealing.. the other a magnesium alloy.

sure weather sealing would be nice.. but you can have that without a metal body.


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> the one thing is weather sealing.. the other a magnesium alloy.
> 
> sure weather sealing would be nice.. but you can have that without a metal body.



I agree that it is possible for a non-metal body to be weather sealed. All the underwater housings for DSLRs prove that as they are all made of plastic. But I have never seen a plastic DSLR body that was weather sealed. So based upon past trends in construction, a plastic body would indicate no weather sealing.


----------



## DanielW (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> The rumored specs have me a bit confused...
> 
> For $2000 you get:
> 
> ...



I mostly agree with you, except on the "toy" thing. I do have a 60D (my first dSLR), and although I would have to agree that magnesium alloy bodies feel much better (took a couple shots with a friend's 5DmIII the other day), I don't think plastic is as bad as you put it. In other words, I can live with a little (too much) plastic. Sure I'll have to take care, but I would anyway, since I'll have paid $2,000 for it! (And, well, it's cheaper for a reason, after all.)
Many amateurs folks like me who are current Rebel and 60D owners and just can't justify $3,000+ on a camera will welcome the specs, I think, as it lets us into the FF world and plastic would be no step backwards anyway. I'd rather have a better focus system, better low-light capabilities and a pop-up flash than a better body, if I'm to choose (and I am, since I won't make any money -- at least soon -- from it). If I didn't care about money I would just buy a 5DmIII, another flash and a bunch of L lenses, but I'd probably have more camera than I need.
Well, that's just me, anyway... I understand that photographers who own lots of gear already won't be missing pop-up flashes and that kind of thing, but for a first FF, well, I think it'll be a great camera. It'll be just another soon-to-be-obsolete thing of the many things I own anyway, but one that was not so expensive and that fits my needs. Couldn't ask for more.
Plastic? Give me some! I can take it!


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > But I have never seen a plastic DSLR body that was weather sealed. So based upon past trends in construction, a plastic body would indicate no weather sealing.
> ...



Apologies. I am not aware of specs regarding Nikon cameras. If they have weather sealed a plastic body, then I would certainly hope that Canon follows suite. It's not that I'm a Canon fanboy for not following Nikon cameras; but just that I have no place in my budget to even begin considering to purchase a Nikon camera, build a lens collection, and incorporate it into my shooting.


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.



It isn't going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and pros. That's what the 5DIII is for. This is an entry-level FF body. You pays your money, you takes your choice.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> Apologies. I am not aware of specs regarding Nikon cameras. If they have weather sealed a plastic body, then I would certainly hope that Canon follows suite. It's not that I'm a Canon fanboy for not following Nikon cameras; but just that I have no place in my budget to even begin considering to purchase a Nikon camera, build a lens collection, and incorporate it into my shooting.



it´s just a rumor yet .. but i see no reason why it should not be possible.
it would reduce the cost and a metal alloy is not needed... prefered yes.


----------



## ablearcher (Jul 16, 2012)

So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.

Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.

If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

DanielW said:


> I mostly agree with you. I do have a 60D (my first dSLR), and although I would have to agree that magnesium alloy bodies feel much better (took a couple shots with a friend's 5DmIII the other day), I don't think plastic is as bad as you put it. In other words, I can live with a little (too much) plastic. Sure I'll have to take care, but I would anyway, since I'll have paid $2,000 for it! (And, well, it's cheaper for a reason, after all.)
> Many amateurs folks like me who are current Rebel and 60D owners and just can't justify $3,000+ on a camera will welcome the specs, I think, as it lets us into the FF world and plastic would be no step backwards anyway. I'd rather have a better focus system, better low-light capabilities and a pop-up flash than a better body, if I'm to choose (and I am, since I won't make any money -- at least soon -- from it). If I didn't care about money I would just buy a 5DmIII, another flash and a bunch of L lenses, but I'd probably have more camera than I need.
> Well, that's just me, anyway... I understand that photographers who own lots of gear already won't be missing pop-up flashes and that kind of thing, but for a first FF, well, I think it'll be a great camera. It'll be just another soon-to-be-obsolete thing of the many things I own anyway, but one that was not so expensive and that fits my needs. Couldn't ask for more.
> Plastic? Give me some! I can take it!



We'll have to see what actually becomes of this rumored entry level FF. As Canon-F1 just pointed out, the Nikon D600 is a plastic body that will be weather sealed. If Canon's version is equipped similarly, then I'm sure it will fit the demands of many more photographers. Heck, I might even buy one as a back up... Maybe get rid of my 5D Mark II's if it proves to be better.


----------



## johnroberts (Jul 16, 2012)

Having worked on various products I'd say metal, plastic, natural materials etc all have their place. My film EOS-3 has a "plastic" exterior with weather seals. I have never found it wanting even against the EOS-1V. 

I'd be disapointed if it was built like an older style rebel but the newer ones like the 550 and up feel pretty good (minus any toxic grip issues like the 650D). 




takoman46 said:


> Canon-F1 said:
> 
> 
> > the one thing is weather sealing.. the other a magnesium alloy.
> ...


----------



## DanielW (Jul 16, 2012)

ablearcher said:


> So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.
> 
> Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.
> 
> If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.



It looks like we're sitting on the same fence


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

ablearcher said:


> So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.
> 
> Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.
> 
> If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.



the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.

for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.


----------



## Bosman (Jul 16, 2012)

Do people realize many of the L lenses incorporate plastic or are mostly plastic, yet are weather sealed???


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> ablearcher said:
> 
> 
> > So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.
> ...



Here is my choice as if you have asked me that question. If Canon low down the price of Mark II to $1500, I would take it over the new entry level stuff. However, that is my idea (I have Mark II, 7D and 30D already, no need another one.)

My 2 Cents


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.



Pretty sure we've been down this road before, but I'm too lazy to dig through old threads to find it...
My car has a bunch of plastic in it, and I'm pretty sure it does okay in rain, high humidity and extreme temperature changes. Matter of fact, the space shuttles used plastic in all kinds of different applications (http://www.glenair.com/html/plastics.htm), so long story short, no plastic doesn't bother me in the least.


----------



## ablearcher (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> [the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.
> 
> for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
> and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.


 Somehow I doubt that a lot of new DSLR buyers are jumping straight into FF market. Its mostly Rebels, 60D or 7D tops. This entry level FF will be perfect as a second body for many serious amateurs (with Rebels/7D) and likely for many pros with their MKII and even MKIII who do not want/can not afford spending another $3.5K on a body.


----------



## Rocky (Jul 16, 2012)

I do not mind that is a plastic ( as long as it is good plastic and no funky coating. I would rather have the textured plastic)) body. However, It should include the micro-adjustment for AF ans some weather seal. I will trade these for a magnesium body ant time


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.
> 
> for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
> and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.



As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice. Everyone I know who buys their first DSLR simply decides by asking their friends and family who are experienced or even sometimes inexperienced DSLR shooters what they use and why they use it. So I doubt the market will really change between Canon and Nikon. When a beginner comes up to me and asks me what brand I recommend and why, I tell them this: Both Canon and Nikon have great cameras and you will probably be happy with either. But I recommend Canon because the user interface is more intuitive to a beginner than a Nikon. This has always resulted in the new buyer deciding upon a Canon because they are usually worried about the learning curve and by no means ready to dive into advanced operations of a DSLR. All the FF cameras offered will have advanced control layouts that facilitate shooting efficiency and that's something that I think new buyers are not ready for and don't really care to learn until they gain a better understanding of camera operation. In which case, that what upgrading is there for! muahahaha.


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 16, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.
> ...



I think you missed a bunch of previous posts including the ones about the weather sealing of plastic "camera" bodies, but point taken anyway lmao


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice.



i may have a different surrounding. 

where i live most fathers or mothers would not buy a rebel camera.
as they would not buy anything below a middle class car, not even for their 18 year old sons and daughters. 

it would look bad... especially in hard economic times.
i know it´s strange but that´s how it is. 
but you are right that´s not the norm.


----------



## Rocky (Jul 16, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> Canon-F1 said:
> 
> 
> > the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.
> ...


The control on 5D, 7D, even 60D is easier to use than any Rebel, due to the second control wheel. Rebel is aiming at price point, not convenience. As for whether to choose APS-C or FF, the price play a important role. Therefore a sub $2000 FF will draw more people that are upgrading from P & S. Also there are two types of P & S up-graders: 1. without any film photography background. 2 with film photographic background. The later one will have more tendency to go for the FF if the price is right.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 17, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:



> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice.
> ...



wonder as if canon add an extra mode of "auto" into this entry level full frame camera?


----------



## Rocky (Jul 17, 2012)

dilbert said:


> I think it has been shown that the hard plastics used to make DSLRs out of are anything but toy-like.
> 
> Given that all of the magnesium alloy body DSLRs that I have are showing metal in various spots on the body due to the paint rubbing off, I'm not exactly sure that black plastic will be bad (the black won't rub off.)


The black coating on Rebel does got rubbed off. That is why Canon should take a lesson from other manufactures that do not use coating. Instead, they add texture to the plastic surface.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 17, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> Depends on how you view things... I shoot professionally, and while the D800 DR is great at low ISO, at ISO 800 and beyond is canon's territory and frankly, daytime shots, the only time I'd be able to really take advantage of low iso DR, most of it would be washed away when I increase contrast as D800 shots tend to be muddy... I'm not taking anything away from what Nikon has produced, it's a very good and very impressive camera, but in no way is the 5d3 inferior or a bad sensor... I'm sure there are those product and or landscape photogs chomping at the bit for a much improved sensor, but in the end, either camera will satisfy 95% of all photogs... If you feel canon failed, that's your opinion... But it is, as a camera, an awesome tool.



The 5D3 doesn't really start doing better until more like ISO6400 not ISO800.

D800 shots are muddy???


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 17, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.



Wouldn't a metal body tend to expand and contract more than a plastic one? 

I'm not sure weather sealing has much to do with what they use either. That said, I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if they put in less sealing than on the 5D3.

A good plastic can hold up pretty well.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 17, 2012)

Bosman said:


> Do people realize many of the L lenses incorporate plastic or are mostly plastic, yet are weather sealed???



Nonsense! All L lenses have solid metal construction! What do you think the L stands for?
LEAD

 ;D


----------



## EchoLocation (Jul 17, 2012)

I'm a 5DC owner along with a 24-105 and a 50 1.4. I have been wanting better AF and AFMA for a long time now and never wanted the 5DII because of the AF. 
I would love a 5DIII, but I believe it is a 2800 dollar camera that after a year of being on the market should be 2500 dollars. I would have preordered for 2800. The new 24-70 lens is very very expensive and this was my main choice for a single travel lens.
After seeing the comparisons between the 5DIII and the D800 I think that the D800 is much more of an improvement in sensor performance over the D700 than the 5DIII is over the 5DII.
From the rumored specs, I think most people agree that the D600 looks better on paper than this new Canon FF camera, especially after the improvements shown in the D800(mentioned above.)
I love Canon, and have been a loyal customer for years, but I am not heavily invested in the system. I don't like the direction of their pricing(one of the reasons I bought them in the first place was the relatively cheaper pricing than the Nikon version(Canon 24-70 I is cheaper than Nikon 5DII was cheaper than D700.) That is not the case anymore.
If Canon makes a FF mirrorless, I will be thrilled and buy it if it is around $3k with a lens. 
However, at this moment, comparing a D600 for 1500 and a Canon FF, I will choose the D600. I wish this was not the case, but in my opinion(and based on rumored specs, and sensor performance of their current cameras), the Canon offering is a little low on features, low on sensor performance, and higher in price. I will gladly purchase a D600 and 24-70 for around 3300 dollars than the Canon versions for over 4300 dollars.
My .02 cents.


----------



## rcha101 (Jul 17, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?



Totally agree, Bought myself a 5DII this year for exactly that reason.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 17, 2012)

If this entry-level FF camera has the same noise sensitivity as the 5D3, a "silent" shooting mode, and options for setting minimum ISO/shutter speed, I'll surely be getting one.


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 17, 2012)

mclaren777 said:


> If this entry-level FF camera has the same noise sensitivity as the 5D3, a "silent" shooting mode, and options for setting minimum ISO/shutter speed, I'll surely be getting one.



If what you hope for turns out to be true, I might sell my 5D Mark 3 and buy one of these entry level FF just out of spite.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 17, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> If what you hope for turns out to be true, I might sell my 5D Mark 3 and buy one of these entry level FF just out of spite.



Giving Canon $5500 is spiteful?


----------



## baronng (Jul 17, 2012)

For amateurs, dual card slots/full weather sealing is not really a must
they mostly concerns IQ 

an entry level FF called 6D,5D lite would be awesome; 
single SD slot, built-in flash,lighter plastic body, 19 AF points, slower 4 fps is really excellent

but there is no point to trust a CR2 rumor from canonrumors......it is not much different from CR0
you can check the track records


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jul 17, 2012)

This is good news... I have been saving up to replace my body in the next 6-9 months... I was waiting to see what APS-C offerings would surface. However, a smaller, more compact FF would certainly be of interest!  However, weather sealing on body and lenses is becomeing more important for me.

*19 AF points is more than enough for me
*AFMA would also be great
*Weather sealing

If it has those, i am very interested indeed!


----------



## sandymandy (Jul 17, 2012)

> author=LetTheRightLensIn link=topic=8046.msg147131
> 
> Wouldn't a metal body tend to expand and contract more than a plastic one?



I dont think normal operating temperatures cause any significant expansion and/or contraction. Not many people out there who use their camera in the antarctic or near volcanos etc. i think. And then probably the material doesnt matter anyway cuz its just so extreme.

Im quite happy about having a "cheap" entry FF dslr coming out. 5D Mark 3 is really expensive.

Hopefully it also got better control than the rebels but im sure about that. I just got a rebel and its such a pain in the ass to switch ISO/WB/Exposure Mode cuz u gotta frickle through menus and got no direct access buttons. Custom Functions doesnt help me fully too.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Jul 17, 2012)

Ricku said:


> Yaaawn!
> 
> Still waiting for a FF camera from Canon, that offers a real IQ upgrade over the 5D2.
> 
> You know.. Like Nikon's D800 does.




Shot with the D800 last weekend. Overall not super impressed. Had my 5D Mark III handy for comparison shots. The images coming out of my Canon were good enough with excellent IQ and the color fidelity straight out of camera was simply gorgeous compared to the Nikon's natural green cast! Yes 36MP look good on a spec sheet, but in the studio my 22MP Canon was able to hold it's own and in some ways was even better. Another thing to point out is that the D800 is approaching Medium Format resolution and thus not as forgiving to focus.


----------



## Ew (Jul 17, 2012)

Has anyone seen the specs on the upcoming (claimed August) Sony a99 ?? http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/the-a99-specs-do-you-like-the-camera/

10-12 Fps
1080p @ 60 Fps (first dslr to do so)

Wonder if this will put pressure on Canon, and with the lower price FF coming, get them to add something via Firmware to the 5D3.


----------



## sandymandy (Jul 17, 2012)

Sony doesnt put pressure on anybody. Not such a great company anymore since Playstation 2.


----------



## madmailman (Jul 17, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Nonsense! All L lenses have solid metal construction! What do you think the L stands for?
> LEAD
> 
> ;D



All "L" lenses. Except the 100mm L Macro.


----------



## steliosk (Jul 17, 2012)

an articulated screen would be nice in FF
its a handy tool for low angle shots.


----------



## ecka (Jul 17, 2012)

After 5D3 was released at $3500 MSRP, this lower class FF body is starting to make sense to me . I just hope it will have CF slot in it, not SDHC . Vari-angle LCD would be great too.


----------



## samirachiko (Jul 17, 2012)

steliosk said:


> an articulated screen would be nice in FF
> its a handy tool for low angle shots.



Agree!! A lot of people want a swivel screen!!! It is very useful for anyone who love take videos (and also photos obviously)!! 

My hope:
19 af point
swivel screen
CF card!!!
built in flash
viewfinder 100%

2000 euro


----------



## Abraxx (Jul 17, 2012)

I think its far to early to compare any kind of rumoured specs between a D600 or a 6D or whatever.
So no reason to be excited or moan or bash anything.
 
:


----------



## Vikmnilu (Jul 17, 2012)

So, for Canon, 2000 dollars is the price for an "entry level" camera.... my goodness I paid 1000 euros when I started with digital DSLRs for a EOS 10D and I thought it was a lot of money already.... 
anyway....


----------



## Etienne (Jul 17, 2012)

madmailman said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > Nonsense! All L lenses have solid metal construction! What do you think the L stands for?
> ...



35 f1.4L has a plastic exterior


----------



## setrio (Jul 17, 2012)

I have a 600d and have a couple L lenses (35 1.4 L 70-200 2.8 IS II)I want to upgrade to a full frame camera. A 5D mark III is just way to expensive I rather spend my money on glass. 1500-2000 for a FF camera with good AF, and 5d mark III sensor is perfect for me. I dont mind the 4fps nor the plastic body I just care about the IQ a FF sensor can give.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 17, 2012)

I get the feeling reading this that its just MP envy... I don't get it, half the comments are based on this idea that this is an upgrade for the mk2...it isn't, its a replacement for it, not an upgrade ---the upgrade is already on the shelves at stores...

And another thing I don't get - those who have a chip on their shoulder because the mk3 wasn't tailor made to their needs toss the mk3 under the bus and try to promote a fiction that its failing in the marketplace, when it isn't!!!. If you check amazons top selling slr list, the mk3 has been in the top 10 since it became available. For most of the time it has been right next to the d800 in sales...but as i look today the d800 isn't even on the list anymore (guessing nikon is having supply issues cause its no longer even in the top 20). Either way, the mk3 is ranked at 4th right now, and the top 3 are sub $800 camera's. That doesn't sound to me like a camera that's flopping....

I totally get that if your a studio shooter the mk3, or this entry level FF isn't for you, but, for those of us working in a variety of conditions, the mk3 is amazing...and if this entry level FF can hold its own in terms of high ISO IQ, then this may be an affordable backup body. Think of it, if ISO 12,800 on an mk3 looks like ISO 3200 on a mk2, then, if you can achieve similar quality (not even equal, lets say ISO 6400 looks like ISO 3200 on an mk2...then yeah that would be enough to make me say give me this entry level FF as my backup...)

I look at it like this ----I know many local wedding shooters in my area, and about half are canon, half are nikon ---- many are grabbing mk3's or planning on picking one up in the fall. On the nikon side, wedding shooters are going for the d3, d3s, or the d700. And the nikonians I have talked too have said they probably won't be buying a d800 due to the extremely huge file sizes (and if they did, it would sit in the bag most of the time, only to emerge for the formal shots or a few key ceremony shots - not worth it in most of my local communities eyes). 

So, while the d800 is impressive, the mk3 is much more well rounded, and therefore fits into the marketplace quite nicely. 

Now this new entry level...could be awesome, could be a flop, who knows...and same goes for the rumored d600...its all in the land of who knows...but hey, its fn to make a 30 page thread! LOL, the d800 vs the mk3 thing has been beaten to death, lets smack the corpse around a little more!


----------



## Etienne (Jul 17, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Think of it, if ISO 12,800 on an mk3 looks like ISO 3200 on a mk2, then, if you can achieve similar quality (not even equal, lets say ISO 6400 looks like ISO 3200 on an mk2...then yeah that would be enough to make me say give me this entry level FF as my backup...)



I have a 5DII and I will upgrade to 5DIII, but high ISO performance is NOT that much better unless you shoot only JPG. Who does that on a 5D series camera?

Comparing ISO performance using out-of-the-camera jpeg shots is nonsense.

The only place you get 2 stops of improvement is in video. That is cool on it's own. For photos it is about 1/2 a stop improvement.

Other than that, I agree the 5DIII is an awesome camera with a ton of upgrades over the 5DII.


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 17, 2012)

Vikmnilu said:


> So, for Canon, 2000 dollars is the price for an "entry level" camera.... my goodness I paid 1000 euros when I started with digital DSLRs for a EOS 10D and I thought it was a lot of money already....
> anyway....



Well shoot in early 2004 i bought my first DSLR, the 10D as well... battery grip, extra battery, etc... Paid nearly $1600 at my local store... probably, in hindsight, i could have gotten it cheaper online but I guess I was young and stupid at that time, haha... and not too longer after I bought that camera, the friggen 20D came out... Oh well live and learn


----------



## tron (Jul 17, 2012)

Ew said:


> Wonder if this will put pressure on Canon, and with the lower price FF coming, get them to add something via Firmware to the 5D3.


They may as well remove something from 5D3: The high price ;D


----------



## fman (Jul 17, 2012)

A Pop-Up Flash for FF so that TS-E lens will be a pain to use and anyway it does not allow shutter speed to go below 1/200? I hope not.
No mentioning of dual slots? Even rumored new micro 4/3 (like GH3) bodies will have that...
Canon DSLR video is beaten by even current GH2 (in terms of quality, from usability perspective DSLR does not even come close).
No mentioning of tilt-swivel LCD? I know FF is so professional that no-one needs it...
Sure it can attract a lot of people just because it's FF and can be a money machine for Canon but really is this the DSLR that I'm supposed to be excited in 2012?
I go on and check that micro 4/3 lens chart again now. That's more interesting. The days of these entry level DSLRs can be counted.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 17, 2012)

fman said:


> A Pop-Up Flash for FF so that TS-E lens will be a pain to use and anyway it does not allow shutter speed to go below 1/200? I hope not.
> No mentioning of dual slots? Even rumored new micro 4/3 (like GH3) bodies will have that...
> Canon DSLR video is beaten by even current GH2 (in terms of quality, from usability perspective DSLR does not even come close).
> No mentioning of tilt-swivel LCD? I know FF is so professional that no-one needs it...
> ...



Why not a G1X then?


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 17, 2012)

fman said:


> The days of these entry level DSLRs can be counted.



7,748 and counting... (based on 5/1/1991 release of Kodak DCS 100).


----------



## fman (Jul 17, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> 7,748 and counting... (based on 5/1/1991 release of Kodak DCS 100).



You may have missed the entry level part.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 17, 2012)

fman said:


> thepancakeman said:
> 
> 
> > 7,748 and counting... (based on 5/1/1991 release of Kodak DCS 100).
> ...



Well the DCS WAS ENTRY LEVEL. (The only level infact) ;D


----------



## tron (Jul 17, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> 7,748 and counting...


 ... upwards ;D


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 17, 2012)

fman said:


> thepancakeman said:
> 
> 
> > 7,748 and counting... (based on 5/1/1991 release of Kodak DCS 100).
> ...



Nope, just chose to ignore it because I have no idea which DSLR would classify as the first "entry level". ;D

I don't think they're going away any time soon--I've used the very best point and shoots and bridge cameras, and for my tastes they simply cannot compare to even the lowest level DSLRs (e.g. Rebel T3).


----------



## TTMartin (Jul 17, 2012)

Exactly the Canon 70D that I've been talking about. ;D

60D body, full frame (5D3 sensor - NICE), 7D focus system, low FPS


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 17, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> fman said:
> 
> 
> > thepancakeman said:
> ...



First Canon would be the D30. Before that they were essentially Kodak badged - rather like Nikon badged Sonys


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Jul 17, 2012)

*Reasons for high price of the Mark III*



> Does anyone think that Canon is profiteering with the 5D3?



I've been thinking about that a lot actually, since there are so many people, including myself, who feel like the Mark III is overpriced.

I think there are possibly two factors here:

1. Canon knew there was a huge pent up demand for a better 5D and set the initial price high to take advantage of the early adopters who would spend almost anything to get the new product. When sales taper off, it is easy to lower the MSRP or just start offering discounts like Canon does with all their other photo products. In fact I see discounting already starting to happen at some online retailers.

2. I'm not an economist, but I wonder if Canon is simply finding that their costs are rising and they can't continue to make cameras at the price points we've come to expect? I know I've been spoiled by getting upgraded technology every few years at about the same price I paid last time. Maybe inflation and currency changes are bringing that era to an end.

I have a feeling that the new "entry level" FF camera is a signal that Canon plans to keep the price of the Mark III rather high. :'(

What do you guys think?


----------



## TTMartin (Jul 17, 2012)

FunPhotons said:


> 7enderbender said:
> 
> 
> > How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?
> ...



Sounds like someone puts too much faith in DxOMark and not enough in their own eyes.

Not to meantion the 7D auto focus system.


----------



## ablearcher (Jul 17, 2012)

*Re: Reasons for high price of the Mark III*



drmikeinpdx said:


> I have a feeling that the new "entry level" FF camera is a signal that Canon plans to keep the price of the Mark III rather high. :'(
> 
> What do you guys think?


 I think it depends on what they are going to offer as this new entry level FF. If the key factors (IQ and AF) are a success then this entry level FF might become a good alternative for many who is sitting on a fence waiting for lower price of MKIII. In other words, if the new FF starts stealing MKIII's buyers and MKIII sales slow down (might be for a numbe of reasons actually - new Canon FF, new entry level FF from Nikon, better availability and elimination of bugs in Nikon D800). In that case MKIII original MSRP gotta go down. I think it will go down somewhat regardless. New canon FF might not be a huge success, but Nikon's offerings and aggressive pricing will take care of that.


----------



## ablearcher (Jul 17, 2012)

TTMartin said:


> FunPhotons said:
> 
> 
> > 7enderbender said:
> ...


 +1. The CR indicated same sensor as MKIII, not MKII. So how about "a plastic MKIII equivalent" for $2K with a bit less features (instead of MKII equivalent)? All of a sudden it starts looking quite atteractive, huh?


----------



## ssrdd (Jul 17, 2012)

2000/-??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Canon must be kidding.

Again it lost on
Nikon D600 24mp full frame under 1600usd.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 17, 2012)

ssrdd said:


> 2000/-??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Canon must be kidding.
> 
> Again it lost on
> Nikon D600 24mp full frame under 1600usd.



How do you figure that the D600 will be better than the new Canon ff?

Neither have been announced nor tested - yet you are dissing Canon?


----------



## cliffwang (Jul 17, 2012)

ssrdd said:


> 2000/-??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Canon must be kidding.
> 
> Again it lost on
> Nikon D600 24mp full frame under 1600usd.



We don't know if the price of D600 is really about 1.5K or not. If so, the new FF camera should be about 1.5K as well. Too early to talk about the price. Anyway, I am glad to see Canon responses to Nikon's D600.


----------



## D_Rochat (Jul 17, 2012)

There have been many valid points on why the 5DIII costs what it does, how Canon and Nikon both make great products but are for different uses and that it is stupid to get over excited about rumored specs and costs of two cameras that don't yet exist. Yet you all choose to ignore those posts and just bitch like spoiled children. This forum has turned to shit and I'm disappointed with myself for getting sucked into the nonsense and sticking around. So long.....


----------



## ablearcher (Jul 17, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> it is stupid to get over excited about rumored specs and costs of two cameras that don't yet exist.


 This is a very strange post for a forum on a Canon *RUMORS* website. Just reading the name of the website alone it should be quite obvious why people come here and what they are mostly discussing, don't you think??? If you don't like to read or participate in such discussions - well there are plenty of websites and forums dedicated to existing and already announced gear. Feel free to move on.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 17, 2012)

ablearcher said:


> D_Rochat said:
> 
> 
> > it is stupid to get over excited about rumored specs and costs of two cameras that don't yet exist.
> ...



In the EOS bodies section of the Forum it is disappointing to get Canon flamed for something which is no more than a rumour.

The post that he was complaining about should have been in a different section or better still - Nikon rumours


----------



## birdman (Jul 17, 2012)

Hey, enough with all the damned name-calling on here. Can't we all get along 

I think the Canon rumored budget FF will be around $2,000 - 2,500. Lotta wiggle room there. The 5d3 can be had for just over $3,000 all over Ebay. Still, I don't feel like it should retail for even $3,000 given that the 5d2 was $2699, right? I feel like replacement models should hold basically the same price point. Look at cars for example. A 2000 model Honda Accord is essentially the same price as a 2012 model. Perhaps $1,500-2,500 more, but that's only about 10% inflation in 12 years!!


----------



## Trovador (Jul 17, 2012)

I heard from a Canon sales rep (he asked not to be named, sorry) that the entry level FF was going to be 52mp, usable ISO 50-204,000 expandable to 816,000, 12fps, weather sealed, 20 steps dynamic range, radio wireless pop-up flash, 124 point auto focus, 4 simultaneous Digic 6+ processors, and will accept lenses from all brands. US$1,599. It will only be available in bright pink and lavender. Late September launch.

True story.


----------



## fman (Jul 17, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> I've used the very best point and shoots and bridge cameras, and for my tastes they simply cannot compare to even the lowest level DSLRs (e.g. Rebel T3).



Have you also choose to ignore that I was talking about interchangeable lens micro 4/3 (like Olympus E-M5 or Panasonic GH2) and not point and shoots and bridge cameras?

Just because if you cannot make a difference between micro 4/3 and point & shoot/bridge then probably there is no point in any further discussion...

Don't even bother to make a bit of search with terms like "GH2 beats 5D". I did not need to search as I have personal experience both with Canon DSLR and e.g. GH2.


----------



## dawgfanjeff (Jul 17, 2012)

Trovador said:


> I heard from a Canon sales rep (he asked not to be named, sorry) that the entry level FF was going to be 52mp, usable ISO 50-204,000 expandable to 816,000, 12fps, weather sealed, 20 steps dynamic range, radio wireless pop-up flash, 124 point auto focus, 4 simultaneous Digic 6+ processors, and will accept lenses from all brands. US$1,599. It will only be available in bright pink and lavender. Late September launch.
> 
> True story.



Bummer. I was hoping for 126 pt auto focus 124 simply won't do. Oh well. Guess I'll have to switch to Nikon now


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 17, 2012)

fman said:


> thepancakeman said:
> 
> 
> > I've used the very best point and shoots and bridge cameras, and for my tastes they simply cannot compare to even the lowest level DSLRs (e.g. Rebel T3).
> ...



Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2? ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 17, 2012)

fman said:


> thepancakeman said:
> 
> 
> > I've used the very best point and shoots and bridge cameras, and for my tastes they simply cannot compare to even the lowest level DSLRs (e.g. Rebel T3).
> ...



No need to get snippy. If you're saying that mirrors will go away, then yes I believe you are correct. I don't really care if it's a SLR or a DLR or a NLNR (no lens no reflex, and yes I'm just making it up). If you're talking about sensor sizes...again, most people don't really care. Give them the IQ they want with the compatibility of their lenses and an ability to print the size that they need and they won't care exactly how the engineers accomplished that (except for other engineers and people who like to hang out on forums arguing tech specs.)

Most people that I know who are dedicated to DSLR, it's the viewfinder vs. the screen and lens selections that are the issues. I seriously doubt many people care whether or not it actually has a mirror (kinda like saying "I'll only by a car if it has a Getrag transmission"). It's not the transmission, it's the whole package. And when the whole package gives a similar (or better) experience, then L in DSLR will go away.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 17, 2012)

Trovador said:


> I heard from a Canon sales rep (he asked not to be named, sorry) that the entry level FF was going to be 52mp, usable ISO 50-204,000 expandable to 816,000, 12fps, weather sealed, 20 steps dynamic range, radio wireless pop-up flash, 124 point auto focus, 4 simultaneous Digic 6+ processors, and will accept lenses from all brands. US$1,599. It will only be available in bright pink and lavender. Late September launch.
> 
> True story.



great and awsome specs... okae... in this forums, to people who current have 5d iii. as if anyone wants to sale it back for half price of the up coming new entry level camera with above specs, i'll get them all


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 17, 2012)

ablearcher said:


> TTMartin said:
> 
> 
> > FunPhotons said:
> ...



if canon put following into mark II, it would be nice
1. new sensor (does not have to be digic 5+, can be digic 5 like t4i)
2. 7d focus system
3. firmware upgrade including 7d new firmware feature

i guess, sale volume will be massive as if they are doing this... anyone agree to buy this kinda camera for $2000? i think i would and yes it is in between 5d ii and 5d iii. (both side happy, canon's customers and canon owners.)


----------



## 7enderbender (Jul 17, 2012)

Bosman said:


> Do people realize many of the L lenses incorporate plastic or are mostly plastic, yet are weather sealed???



True. And sad. Any time I compare my so called "L" lenses to my old "non-L" FD lenses I can only shake my head. Yes, the EF lenses are mostly, shall we say, decent. But that's about it. And I know they won't be around for 25 years or longer.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 17, 2012)

.
Sorry, not good enough. I won't be satisfied until each pixel is its own individual AF point. And no IR capability either?

And I heard the Nikon version of this camera is 128MP. Canon will still be in last place!






Trovador said:


> I heard from a Canon sales rep (he asked not to be named, sorry) that the entry level FF was going to be 52mp, usable ISO 50-204,000 expandable to 816,000, 12fps, weather sealed, 20 steps dynamic range, radio wireless pop-up flash, 124 point auto focus, 4 simultaneous Digic 6+ processors, and will accept lenses from all brands. US$1,599. It will only be available in bright pink and lavender. Late September launch.
> 
> True story.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 17, 2012)

Trovador said:


> I heard from a Canon sales rep (he asked not to be named, sorry) that the entry level FF was going to be 52mp, usable ISO 50-204,000 expandable to 816,000, 12fps, weather sealed, 20 steps dynamic range, radio wireless pop-up flash, 124 point auto focus, 4 simultaneous Digic 6+ processors, and will accept lenses from all brands. US$1,599. It will only be available in bright pink and lavender. Late September launch.
> 
> True story.



I am going to wait for the high mps version


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 17, 2012)

Etienne said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Think of it, if ISO 12,800 on an mk3 looks like ISO 3200 on a mk2, then, if you can achieve similar quality (not even equal, lets say ISO 6400 looks like ISO 3200 on an mk2...then yeah that would be enough to make me say give me this entry level FF as my backup...)
> ...



Actually, I was talking about RAW files. I've had mine for about 2 weeks now and have done some pretty nutty ridiculous low light shots, all in RAW. My frame of reference is mostly from the 7D, but, I have talked with many who have used the mk2 more than me and they are saying the same thing...basically 12800 ISO is the new 3200 ISO, and where 6400 used to be i'd go there if i had too, its now totally usable (seriously 6400 looks like 1600 on my 7d).


----------



## idimoe (Jul 18, 2012)

Hmm Photokina in 2 months. Anyone else excited? 

I hope Nikon and Canon will have supplies on hand for this holiday season. These entry FFs should be a huge hit.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 18, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Chuck Alaimo said:
> ...



I can believe 2 stops improvement compared to the 7D. Most of the reviews indicate only a modest improvement over the 5DII at high ISO, except apparently the in-camera JPGs. Reviews do indicate that high ISO in Movie mode improves enormously in the 5DIII.

Either way, you have a great camera, and I intend to get one too


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2? ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...



He must have been talking about video, in which case he is right (except in certain low light cases). Gh2 beats the best of the Canon dslrs. As for stills, the gh2 can't hang with the big boys.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jul 18, 2012)

Canon Rumors said:


> Compatible with full frame STM lenses



Are not all Canon DSLRs compatible with _full frame_ STM lenses?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 18, 2012)

Etienne said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



You'll just have to experience it yourself I guess...and when you do, you'll be saying wow a lot!

The attached shot - ISO 20,000 - f4, 1/40th, taken at night no flash...4th of july...this was on my second day with the mk3, was shooting the fireworks, played it safe for most of that night and used flash, once I had fulfilled my requirements decided to play and snap some candids at crazy high ISO just to see how it would handle it. I'd say, not so bad... ;D


----------



## mrgazpacho (Jul 18, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> Are not all Canon DSLRs compatible with _full frame_ STM lenses?



I think the emphasis is on the full-time quiet video AF capability.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 18, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> You'll just have to experience it yourself I guess...and when you do, you'll be saying wow a lot!
> 
> The attached shot - ISO 20,000 - f4, 1/40th, taken at night no flash...4th of july...this was on my second day with the mk3, was shooting the fireworks, played it safe for most of that night and used flash, once I had fulfilled my requirements decided to play and snap some candids at crazy high ISO just to see how it would handle it. I'd say, not so bad... ;D



were you shot that picture under raw or jpeg format? any noise reduction level were set? as if you allow me to ask...

thanks


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 18, 2012)

shot RAW, no in cam noise reduction ---I reduced noise in lightroom, adjusted color temp, and lifted the shadows a bit


----------



## ssrdd (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> ssrdd said:
> 
> 
> > 2000/-??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...



well look at the chronology of the canons price factor. 
500$ less cheaper D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3.

so i guess D600 performs as well as price mentioned, but canon never did perform as their worth.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

ssrdd said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > ssrdd said:
> ...



I guess that is why Nikon is #2 then

Does the "D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3" ? I would guess which angle you are coming from and is totally subjective.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> ssrdd said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



i'm still trying to decipher "chronology of the canons price factor"


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2?  ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...



From flexibility/portability perspective a GH2 + a bunch of micro 4/3 lens (which still cost less, weighs less and takes less space in your bag) are way better than an 1Ds3 with 200 f/2.
So yes in 99.9999% of the cases yes micro 4/3 with a bunch of lens is better (for stills E-M5, for video GH2 or G5). For the remaining 0.0001% 1Ds3+ 200 f/2 wins big time (when you need extreme low light performance, background blurring etc.).

All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy and space taking way for non pro usage. In most of the cases it's also a costly way. Far too many people have the misconception that for vacations, daily snapshots they need a DSLR and couple of expensive lens. In fact most would be better served with something smaller, lighter and most of the time less expensive.
Real pro usage is different. However that's probably not the target for an entry level crop or FF DSLR with crippled ergonomics and functionality.


----------



## maxxevv (Jul 18, 2012)

ssrdd said:


> well look at the chronology of the canons price factor.
> 500$ less cheaper D800 beets the crap out of 500$ more expensive 5Dmk3.
> 
> so i guess D600 performs as well as price mentioned, but canon never did perform as their worth.



don't get what you mean in the first sentence. 

But in my part of the world, the 5DMkIII is actually cheaper than the D800 in the stores. And availability is way, way better. The stores basically can get hold of replacement stocks within 5-6 working days right from the first batches ( which were like barely 2~3 weeks after launch). D800 was a rare commodity for a few months in fact. None of the shops could get hold of any for multiple weeks ( stretches into a month + ) after their first batch. And it was similarly so for replacement batches. Even now, the shops cannot confirm when their next shipment be should they finish their existing stock. 

What good is a camera that you can barely get hold of versus one that you could have used to shoot for thousands of quality photos and captured plenty of priceless memories in the same elapsed time ?


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2? ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...
> ...



If you are after something portable and cheap then clearly a P&S would be better than a 4/3 using your argument

However, weight and money are not everybody's priority. You might think that on vacation smaller, lighter and less expensive is 'better' but I dont want to come back with 'snaps'. I am going on vacation to France on Saturday and will be going round the chateaux and castles as well as some birding( my wife's hobby). 

I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.

The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.


----------



## trulandphoto (Jul 18, 2012)

I haven't read all the posts, but I'm going to predict the new kit lens will be an EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM.


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.
> 
> The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.



Although I have couple of Canon lens (2 of them are whites, but would prefer them in black)+DSLR body, my choice for vacation: Pana 7-14, 14-140 or 14-45 (14-150 would be for Oly) and 20 1.7 + Oly 45 1.8.
So altogether 4 lens (2 zooms, 2 primes).

I don't think that equipment would be holding back me in anything (ok. there is no TS in the set, but TS would be the last thing I'd take with me with for vacation; there is also no macro but I don't shoot macro so much to justify the Pana 45 2.8 ).

I know people who swapped 7D and couple of L lens for such a set. I won't swap DSLR (as it has also its place) but I really don't get excited hearing such rumors like in this post.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.
> ...



Visiting historical buildings and no TS - I just couldn't contemplate it

This thread is about full frame cameras - I have 3 and am waiting for the 4th to be delivered. My standard walkabout is the 1DS3 and 70-200 f/2.8L II hanging off a BR strap. Even simple family shots can be turned into works of art so far beyond the possibilities of a 4/3.


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

I'm always surprised at people who have never tried micro 4/3 and yet they are convinced that they need a FF DSLR with ultra fast lens to make good family/vacation photos (or a portrait cannot be good enough if the background is not melted to nothing).
Lack of confidence? Addiction?
I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).


----------



## Etienne (Jul 18, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> You'll just have to experience it yourself I guess...and when you do, you'll be saying wow a lot!
> 
> The attached shot - ISO 20,000 - f4, 1/40th, taken at night no flash...4th of july...this was on my second day with the mk3, was shooting the fireworks, played it safe for most of that night and used flash, once I had fulfilled my requirements decided to play and snap some candids at crazy high ISO just to see how it would handle it. I'd say, not so bad... ;D



That shot looks great. I never go above 6,400 on the 5DII.
There are a lot of things I am going to love about the 5DIII.
Thanks for the shot. btw ... what lens?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 18, 2012)

Etienne said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > You'll just have to experience it yourself I guess...and when you do, you'll be saying wow a lot!
> ...



24-70L...not the new one though, the old one. When you get yours, try it in the most extreme situations you can! You'll find that 6400 is like safe....which is awesome cause it totally opens things up. Here's a wedding shot - at ISO 6400, f6.3, 1/60th = on my 70-200 2.8 (the non-IS version at 200mm) 6400 is pretty clean. Yes there is noise in the RAW file, but it doesn't take too much to clean it up and you don't lose too much sharpness. I love that I was able to get this shot, no flash, and have some room to play with DOF. On my 7D, I would have had to go with ISO 4000, 2.8, and closer to 1/50 or lower, and thats just to get the shot at all, on a mk2 it would be a similar story.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> I'm always surprised at people who have never tried micro 4/3 and yet they are convinced that they need a FF DSLR with ultra fast lens to make good family/vacation photos (or a portrait cannot be good enough if the background is not melted to nothing).
> Lack of confidence? Addiction?
> I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).



I have a G12 for the occasional picture where a DSLR is not advisable

We all have our own preferences. Why should I buy a 4/3 camera just to try it? I have experienced APS-C, APS-H and FF and the best pictures come from FF - so why go to a very small sensor?

I dont want to use a small camera - yes I am convinced I need a 1 series ff with a fast lens - that has come from many years of experience and I find it condescending to be told that I should be taking a 4/3 to get good family/vacation shots when I *know* that I get better from my full size - and that is due to 'lack of confidence' or 'addiction'. 

You can take your 4/3 and I will take my ff and large whites.

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?



You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?
> ...



Well I take 2 flash and stands etc as default for simple pictures. Tomorrow I will be taking photos of my father and his new kitten - of course I will do flash

Why not take flash on vacation? - There is plenty of room in the car

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> fman said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



How about a scrim/reflector in your kit? :


----------



## thepancakeman (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy



Maybe you just need to start working out--my 7D with 70-200 f/2.8 IS has never seemed heavy to me.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > fman said:
> ...


Have a large reflector


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.



5DmkIII or 1Dx no, but it easily beats 5DmkII in JPG and comes very-very close in RAW at ISO3200:
JPG (pick the camera): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/20
RAW: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/21
A result unimaginable just a year ago...

In video Pana G (G5, GH2) cameras beat any DSLR from Canon including 5DmkIII.

So I don't really see the reason not to travel light.
A pro work is different.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.
> ...



Shoot in jpeg    

Looked at the pictures in the link - and even the tiny web pics show the significant extra noise for the Olympus and the GH2 - so no cigar for the 4/3

I only do stills

Pro work? You mean get paid for family pictures?


----------



## tron (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> fman said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...


There is no point of arguing. I believe that both of you are right. It depends on what someone wants more.
FF with many lenses mean the best possible photos.
Micro 4/3rds mean traveling light, worrying less and ... having the camera always with you!

I, for example, am a 5DII owner. Also, I do have many lenses (except of the big whites lucky brian  ). I wouldn't go on vacation without some of my equipment especially in places I know I will have plenty of opportunities to take pictures. 

However I always get tired of carrying it! I guess it's the price to pay for my preferences. So I can understand that someone can have fun with a tiny 4/3rds camera. 

I will not buy one though because I do not wish to invest on a second system and I always think that the money for a 4/3rds system could go to a new lens :


----------



## Rocky (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).


I am just curious which of the new 7 wonder of the world that a small camera will attract too much attraction. I have been in every continent and a few "third world country" with my DSLR and a reasonable size bag on my shoulder and never have any problem to move around with the local.


----------



## Rocky (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> I'm always surprised at people who have never tried micro 4/3 and yet they are convinced that they need a FF DSLR with ultra fast lens to make good family/vacation photos (or a portrait cannot be good enough if the background is not melted to nothing).
> Lack of confidence? Addiction?
> I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).


Pocketable P & S, M4/3, APS-C, FF all has its own pro's and con's. I just cannot see why you think M3/4 is the family vacation system of choice. To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR. These two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.


----------



## crasher8 (Jul 18, 2012)

*7 Wonders whera big camera would be obtrusive?*

Machu Picchu? Petra?


----------



## Rocky (Jul 18, 2012)

*Re: 7 Wonders whera big camera would be obtrusive?*



crasher8 said:


> Machu Picchu? Petra?


Machu Picchu, no problemo, even with a 70-300 on my camera. Petra, my friend went there with 5D and 4 lenses.


----------



## crasher8 (Jul 18, 2012)

So, what's the mysterious location? Unless the poster is referring to someplace other than what the world regards as the n7w .

Great Wall, Chitzen Itza, Taj Mahal, christ Redeemer , Colosseum?


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

Rocky said:


> To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR. Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.



The viewfinder of the GH2 (sure it's electronic, which means it's also bright) is comparable in size with the VF of the 1Ds and bigger than any of the APS-Cs.
Just scroll down a bit.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page3.asp

From my personal experience AF is also very fast except in very dark scenarios (where also DLSR had trouble without AF assist light from flash centre AF point with f/2.8 or faster lens).
Also in case of micro 4/3 you're not limited with AF to middle point, which is the only possibility in case of 5DmkII due to it's crappy AF point arrangement and archaic AF system.

Sure there is some shutter lag. Never even bothered to look up the specs. 

With the listed lens you cover less, and you have also only one fast prime.

Video compared:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

I like micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.


----------



## fman (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Why not take flash on vacation? - There is plenty of room in the car



Oh I forgot to ask, do you always travel by car overseas? ;D
I really envy you then.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> I like micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.



I am sure you get great enjoyment from your 4/3 which is good.

However you have to understand and accept that your preference is not the same as others.

Perhaps I am am at the other extreme as I will carry around 2 x 1 series all day complete with fast lens and other equipment

Certainly for family pictures I go for the best photos I can - they are worth it and I wont take snaps of them.

Just because we dont agree with your choice doesn't make us wrong - just different.

I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.


----------



## Rocky (Jul 18, 2012)

fman said:


> Rocky said:
> 
> 
> > To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR. Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.
> ...


Try to pan you camera a few times conscecutively. The delay in EVF will give you head ache. The OM-D is supposed to have the best EVF. It did gave me head ache. The lack of one fast prime can be make up with lower high ISO noise. 

May I quote Brian Squibb ( I assume that is his name):
"I am sure you get great enjoyment from your 4/3 which is good."
"However you have to understand and accept that your preference is not the same as others."
"Just because we dont agree with your choice doesn't make us wrong - just different."


----------



## tron (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.


You leave the tripod behind and take 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 ?
600??? That one 600 f/4L IS which let me think: is so small that I guess you carry it in your pocket... ;D


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 18, 2012)

tron said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.
> ...



The tripod doesn't fit in the back box on the bike - but the 600 does  I use it resting on a short monopod


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 18, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car.



 thats so not fair, i knew there haqd to be a + to being over there!
since I live in the most remote capital city in the world to go anywhere worth going its basically 10+ hours by plane and a couple of grand per person


----------



## samirachiko (Jul 22, 2012)

What I'd like to see

swivel screen!
one CF slot
19 Af points

Without all that super professional features of the 5D MK3.

Price 1800 euro with a non L obb.

This could be PERFECT for me and a lot of people!


----------



## crasher8 (Jul 22, 2012)

I for one do not want the articulating screen. I want a stills camera. Now I know of course that it will shoot video and that the cost of video doesn't inherently increase the cost of the body yet a swivel screen does. I'm looking for IQ and simplicity.


----------



## thejoyofsobe (Jul 23, 2012)

It's all shooting style. I use my swivel screen for stills far more than for video. A swivel screen let's over the head shots not be at the mercy of spray and pray and for low angle shots I don't have to get down in the dirt. plus you can be a little stealthier with candids when you don't have a big black camera pressed to your face.


----------



## mathino (Jul 23, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> I for one do not want the articulating screen. I want a stills camera. Now I know of course that it will shoot video and that the cost of video doesn't inherently increase the cost of the body yet a swivel screen does. I'm looking for IQ and simplicity.



Exactly as me  I want camera for stills. I dont want/need articulating screen for my style of shooting. For me, camera without articulating LCD feels more solid - I know I wont break it apart but it just feels more comfortable/solid to me.


----------



## tron (Jul 24, 2012)

mathino said:


> crasher8 said:
> 
> 
> > I for one do not want the articulating screen. I want a stills camera. Now I know of course that it will shoot video and that the cost of video doesn't inherently increase the cost of the body yet a swivel screen does. I'm looking for IQ and simplicity.
> ...



+1


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 25, 2012)

Apart from the new entry level FF camera, I would someday like to see Canon's true replacement for the 1Ds Mark III. I don't think the 5D Mark III necessarily needs a replacement, since if you upgrade the metering, it's effectively a 1D-series in all likelihood. How about a 3-series?


----------



## takoman46 (Jul 25, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Apart from the new entry level FF camera, I would someday like to see Canon's true replacement for the 1Ds Mark III. I don't think the 5D Mark III necessarily needs a replacement, since if you upgrade the metering, it's effectively a 1D-series in all likelihood. How about a 3-series?



Something tells me that the high megapixel FF body will fall in line as a direct 1DS3 replacement. In theory it should deliver top image quality, but not necessarily the best ISO performance. It seems that the 1DX is more of a replacement for the 1D4, but still might be a contender for top image quality at low ISO.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Apart from the new entry level FF camera, I would someday like to see Canon's true replacement for the 1Ds Mark III. I don't think the 5D Mark III necessarily needs a replacement, since if you upgrade the metering, it's effectively a 1D-series in all likelihood. How about a 3-series?



I think they'll stay with the 1D X as a unified 1-series body, and not split that line again. I do expect we'll see a 3-series or whatever they call it - high MP sensor in a 5DIII-type body, 1D X/5DIII AF, but a slow frame rate due to the large MP count.


----------



## mathino (Jul 25, 2012)

Well, there is a chatter about new high MPx body:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1210264

Ive read about above 32 MPx, 45 MPx and 47 MPx. Im sure there is market for such product and I think it could be a new line with 5D-like body. Probably announced sometimes early next year (I wont guess availability with Canon after 1D-X announcement/availability). It could have 4K video with high MPx.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 25, 2012)

mathino said:


> Well, there is a chatter about new high MPx body:
> 
> http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1210264
> 
> Ive read about above 32 MPx, 45 MPx and 47 MPx. Im sure there is market for such product and I think it could be a new line with 5D-like body. Probably announced sometimes early next year (I wont guess availability with Canon after 1D-X announcement/availability). It could have 4K video with high MPx.



Yeah, and the guy also said it was going to be a 1Ds Mark IV. That sounds plausible.


----------



## mathino (Jul 26, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> mathino said:
> 
> 
> > Well, there is a chatter about new high MPx body:
> ...



Hmm, camera labels are hard to guess. And thats not important at all (for me). For Canon it could be wise to announce 36+ MPx camera to quiet all chatter about small resolution...and...to "have more" than Nikon.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 29, 2012)

The 1DX will join my 1D4 for action shots

What I am looking for is a new, improved body to go alongside my 1DS3. I suspect the 1DX will manage the portrait shooting however I do a significant amount of static shots, where colour/metering is more important than either AF or FPS

A high mps body would give me the option of better prints above 16x12

OK I could go D800 but how are their TS lens? - perhaps a Canon body will be the best option methinks.


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 29, 2012)

Here is my entirely speculative take on what might be happening.

The new FF body is the new 70D and will look very much like the 60D. It will have a touch screen, as will all future Canon SLRs.

The 7DII will debut a new APS-C sensor and will essentially be an APS-C 5DIII. However, it will retain and probably extend its fps advantage over the 5DIII. It won't have a pop-up flash.

The Rebel line will remain but, since the M now caters for those wanting compactness, the T5i will grow a little in size - not to the size of the 70D but enough to be considered the 70D's APS-C equivalent.

I must admit, my speculation is driven by my inherent desire for neatness! - simplified upgrade paths for 70D and 700D owners, while strengthening the reasons to own both a 5DIII and a 7DII.


----------

