# EOS 3 (D) Features??



## Markus D (Aug 26, 2013)

8)
Yes, it has been a long time coming, and is still not here. I still have my old faithful EOS3 and film that come out to air from time to time. I also have my just as faithful but not so old 40D and have been waiting for a suitable upgrade. 
Yes, there are worlds of difference between them, but there are some similarities also.

They both have rock solid bodies.
Both have the "essential" picture taking features.
Both have the optional battery grip.
Both can take EF or EF-S lenses.
Both have a decent FPS rate.

In summary, they are both great, solid performers with no bells and whistles. They don't make cups of coffee in the morning but do provide the essential features for photography without having to play too much with menu's etc.

Yes, one is full frame and one APS-C.

Here is my question:

If we were able to put the recently released sensor, processors, weather proofing and articulated screenand focusing capability from the 70D into a solid body, (Metal type), for a reasonable price, what other *feature* (Please note the singular) could a person want?

A cost suggestion please from those interested. I imagine about $2,000.

The idea is to get a solid camera, with basic but ESSENTIAL still (NOT MOVIE) photograph taking capabilities without breaking the bank.

Only one extra feature per person please, just so we don't clutter it up. After all, how many of us use 100% of the features on the existing cameras frequently?

Cheers,

Markus


----------



## mdmphoto (Aug 26, 2013)

My 6D has wi-fi and I use it all the time for my night shots, and on occasion to impress my wife by showing her the shots without downloading from the camera. The eos remote software on my android phone is phenomenal - previewing the shot, changing settings (aperture, shutter, and iso) - I'd definitely want the wi-fi...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 26, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> > "Both can take EF or EF-S lenses."
> 
> 
> 
> Your EOS 3 cannot "take", fit, mount or use EF-s lenses.


+1. The mirror would hit the back of the lens. This has been discussed for over 10 years now.


----------



## Kernuak (Aug 26, 2013)

Markus D said:


> A cost suggestion please from those interested. I imagine about $2,000.


I would expect it to cost more than the 5D MkIII, especially if it was in a larger format body as has been bandied about. Of course, the rumours of a larger body (somewhere between and 1D styles) are just rumours. The EOS 3 was a professional camera, only one step down from the 1 series.


----------



## rs (Aug 26, 2013)

Markus D said:


> The idea is to get a solid camera, with basic but ESSENTIAL still (NOT MOVIE) photograph taking capabilities without breaking the bank.


I can't imagine any manufacturer who has cracked putting a video mode into their stills cameras leaving this feature out in this day and age. Even if its not designed from the ground up for video (which the dual pixel AF in the 70D arguably is), throwing in basic video features with current sensor readout, processing and storage speeds is now almost no more than a firmware feature copied over from a previous model.

I have a 5D2 and have only ever used video on it once just to play about with it. But having that almost unused but very powerful video feature hasn't cost me anything in terms of price or stills image quality.

If anyone is put off buying a DSLR because it has video, where can they turn? There are no other Canon options, no Nikon, Pentax, Sony or mirrorless options. Other than a 40D era second hand DSLR, or something like a Sigma DSLR or a medium format system, as far as I know there's no alternative.


----------



## RGF (Aug 26, 2013)

Don't think it will be able to take both EF and EF-S lens and be full frame. 

Would like to see a mini - 1Dx in a crop sensor body. Would that be a 3Dx or 7Dx?

Canon body numbers are bit random

1D - pro, top of the line. Makes sense
5D - prosumer, full frame
6D - Full frame, amateur
7D - Prosumer (?amateur), cropped sensor

Where would a pro cropped sensor camera go? 3D? 2D? 1Dc is taken.


----------



## Markus D (Aug 27, 2013)

Silly me, Thanks for the lens capability thing gents. I don't have any EF-S lenses. 24-70 2.8 (1), 70-200 F4LIS, 100 Macro 2.8 IS, 70-300 LIS and the 24-105 LIS. Just assumed (silly thing to do) ... Thanks. I have been looking at \getting the 17-55 2.8 and selling the 24-105. Could do with the wider view on some situations. I use the 40D and wifey has the 5DII. So extra width on the 40D would help me compete with her. (Not always a good thing to do 

I see the point about putting video on if it doesn't cost but my thought was to keep the menu systems simple so it is easy to get what is wanted, hopefully with controls rather than menus. Makes for faster access in most cases.

thanks for the comments.


----------



## mdmphoto (Aug 27, 2013)

Actually, SOME ef-s format lenses CAN be used on FF, with limitations, i.e. the Tokina 11-16 crop lens work at 16mm on FF. I'm sure there are others, aren't there?...


----------



## mdmphoto (Aug 27, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> Third party "digital" lenses are not the same thing as EF-S lenses, if you want to butcher the safety stops then some EF-S lenses can be used to take crap heavily vignetted images on a ff camera with the risk of severe damage to that camera, hardly seems worth the effort.
> 
> I do remember back in the day people did experiment with the practicality of various EF-S lenses on EF mounts, mainly so they could use EF-S lenses on the 10D as that predated EF-S and was EF only.



The Tokina (Third-party "digital") 11-16mm f/2.8 lens is in fact designed for crop lenses, and is so marketed; yet its construction does allow it to be used, without vignetting, at 16mm, on FF cameras. I like it because I can use it on both my 6- and 7D bodies, with very satisfactory results. I tried this after learning about it on this and many other forums...


----------



## rs (Aug 27, 2013)

mdmphoto said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Third party "digital" lenses are not the same thing as EF-S lenses, if you want to butcher the safety stops then some EF-S lenses can be used to take crap heavily vignetted images on a ff camera with the risk of severe damage to that camera, hardly seems worth the effort.
> ...


Technically speaking, only lenses with an EF-S mount are EF-S lenses. Which means all third party lens with an image circle only designed to cover an APS-C sensor are in fact EF lens.

The EF-S lenses features an extra bit of plastic at the rear which prevents mounting the lens to any EF mount bodies. EF-S mount bodies have a corresponding extra cut out in the mount, enabling the body to take both EF and EF-S lenses.

Unlike Nikon FX, DX and all Canon mount EF lenses which must be designed to clear a FF mirror, EF-S mount lenses can make use of the extra room left over by the smaller mirror in APS-C bodies, so the rear elements can poke into the body a bit more. This allows some room for manoeuvre on how extreme the retrofocus designs have to be on EF-S lenses.

Pulling out the plastic cover at the rear of a EF-S lens such as the 10-22 does allow it to mount to a FF body, and you can look through the heavily vignetted viewfinder at 10mm - but when the mirror moves, it won't clear the back of the lens until its zoomed in to about 13mm. Incidentally, if you remove the filter the 10-22 fills the frame from 13mm onwards. But I wouldn't recommend trying - even if you stop it down fully, the corners are beyond mush.


----------

