pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Canon 5D Mark III 3 - Rumor Page :)  (Read 237721 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: February 27, 2012, 09:03 »
0
I can't believe they're bringing back eye-controlled autofocus. I found that completely useless back on my Elan IIe. When I look through the viewfinder I'm hardy ever staring straight at the point of focus; I'm looking at the overall composition. My eye darts all over the scene. I don't have to stare directly at the point of focus to tell what is in focus. Just another bell that I will pay for and immediately turn off.


KB

« Reply #101 on: February 27, 2012, 10:29 »
0
Apart from the little "Mark III" badge, which has one more "I", that camera appears to be identical in every respect to the Mk II.  Of course, it's quite possible that they are using the same body but it's also possible someone did a tiny bit of faking of numbers, isn't it?

no, it's different.

Before, the eos was in the smooth part and the 5D was in the grippy part.  Now both are in the middle.  There is also a mic hole just below the logo which wasn't there before.
Also, the mode dial is missing 'CA'. I've never used it, and I don't even know what it is (adds Chromatic Aberrations? :)), but it's gone from the mode dial.

Looks like the real thing to me.

« Reply #102 on: February 27, 2012, 11:48 »
0
Apart from the little "Mark III" badge, which has one more "I", that camera appears to be identical in every respect to the Mk II.  Of course, it's quite possible that they are using the same body but it's also possible someone did a tiny bit of faking of numbers, isn't it?

no, it's different.

Before, the eos was in the smooth part and the 5D was in the grippy part.  Now both are in the middle.  There is also a mic hole just below the logo which wasn't there before.

Ah ... I see it now - they are pictures of two completely different cameras. The top one is different from the Mk2 the one further down the page isn't.

« Reply #103 on: February 27, 2012, 12:40 »
0
Apart from the little "Mark III" badge, which has one more "I", that camera appears to be identical in every respect to the Mk II.  Of course, it's quite possible that they are using the same body but it's also possible someone did a tiny bit of faking of numbers, isn't it?

no, it's different.

Before, the eos was in the smooth part and the 5D was in the grippy part.  Now both are in the middle.  There is also a mic hole just below the logo which wasn't there before.

Ah ... I see it now - they are pictures of two completely different cameras. The top one is different from the Mk2 the one further down the page isn't.

ah yes.. got it.  Sorry - That image farther down the page was just a 'holding' image that I made once, and yes - a simple photoshop job with no attempt at being realistic.  I removed it now to stop any further confusion.  I forgot it was there in all the excitement :)

« Reply #104 on: February 28, 2012, 12:25 »
0
I can't believe they're bringing back eye-controlled autofocus. I found that completely useless back on my Elan IIe. When I look through the viewfinder I'm hardy ever staring straight at the point of focus; I'm looking at the overall composition. My eye darts all over the scene. I don't have to stare directly at the point of focus to tell what is in focus. Just another bell that I will pay for and immediately turn off.

I found eye-controlled focus point very good and useful on my 50E. I couldn't understand why they appear to have abandoned the technology just when they finally got it working well.

Btw, it doesn't operate all the time but only when you depress the shutter halfway down (just like the autofocus does normally) so you can still have your eyes 'darting all over the scene' whilst you are composing. Having done so, you then stare at the point where you want the focus to be and depress the shutter __ and hey presto, the focus point should light up where you are looking. Magic.

« Reply #105 on: February 28, 2012, 14:06 »
0
I can't believe they're bringing back eye-controlled autofocus. I found that completely useless back on my Elan IIe. When I look through the viewfinder I'm hardy ever staring straight at the point of focus; I'm looking at the overall composition. My eye darts all over the scene. I don't have to stare directly at the point of focus to tell what is in focus. Just another bell that I will pay for and immediately turn off.

I found eye-controlled focus point very good and useful on my 50E. I couldn't understand why they appear to have abandoned the technology just when they finally got it working well.

Btw, it doesn't operate all the time but only when you depress the shutter halfway down (just like the autofocus does normally) so you can still have your eyes 'darting all over the scene' whilst you are composing. Having done so, you then stare at the point where you want the focus to be and depress the shutter __ and hey presto, the focus point should light up where you are looking. Magic.

I've never had a camera with eye-controlled focus, but what you explained there sounds very useful.  I hate trying to recompose the shot after focusing and I hate changing my focus points.

« Reply #106 on: February 28, 2012, 14:13 »
0
I can't believe they're bringing back eye-controlled autofocus. I found that completely useless back on my Elan IIe. When I look through the viewfinder I'm hardy ever staring straight at the point of focus; I'm looking at the overall composition. My eye darts all over the scene. I don't have to stare directly at the point of focus to tell what is in focus. Just another bell that I will pay for and immediately turn off.

I found eye-controlled focus point very good and useful on my 50E. I couldn't understand why they appear to have abandoned the technology just when they finally got it working well.

Btw, it doesn't operate all the time but only when you depress the shutter halfway down (just like the autofocus does normally) so you can still have your eyes 'darting all over the scene' whilst you are composing. Having done so, you then stare at the point where you want the focus to be and depress the shutter __ and hey presto, the focus point should light up where you are looking. Magic.


I've also never used it but I agree, what you just described sounds pretty good.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2012, 14:17 by contrastaddict »

RacePhoto

« Reply #107 on: February 28, 2012, 14:44 »
0
I can't believe they're bringing back eye-controlled autofocus. I found that completely useless back on my Elan IIe. When I look through the viewfinder I'm hardy ever staring straight at the point of focus; I'm looking at the overall composition. My eye darts all over the scene. I don't have to stare directly at the point of focus to tell what is in focus. Just another bell that I will pay for and immediately turn off.

I found eye-controlled focus point very good and useful on my 50E. I couldn't understand why they appear to have abandoned the technology just when they finally got it working well.

Btw, it doesn't operate all the time but only when you depress the shutter halfway down (just like the autofocus does normally) so you can still have your eyes 'darting all over the scene' whilst you are composing. Having done so, you then stare at the point where you want the focus to be and depress the shutter __ and hey presto, the focus point should light up where you are looking. Magic.

Would work for me with people riding in the back of a pickup waving at the crowd, grandstand in the back (camera gets terribly confused) or one person in a line of people. On the other hand, everything else 5D is NOT a sports camera. So maybe when the 7D MK II comes out?

I'm still waiting for the G1x which was announced what seems ages ago and hasn't even been delivered yet. What's the date on the new 5D July or August?  ???

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #108 on: March 01, 2012, 10:00 »
0
Canon rumors just posted the what are supposed to be the full specs.

If this is a replacement for the 7D and they still also plan to release a bigger MP 5DX, then that would be a good move on their part.

If this is the only version of the 5D they plan to release over the next three years, I would call this a minor incremental upgrade and a major disappointment. I'll wait a while but my eyes are wandering toward a D800. Three years and this is all they could come up with? It looks like they designed a completely new sensor that's 1MP bigger and reused some parts they had laying around ??? The 5DMII was a parts bin camera but at least they doubled the megapixels which is why it sold like crazy. We now have portable cameras for less than half the cost (NEX-7?) that are getting close to these specs.

What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?

Unsurpassed Image Quality
22.3 Megapixel Full Frame CMOS sensor
DiG!C 5+ Image Processor
ISO 100-25600 (expandable to L:50 H1:51200, H2: 102400
Full HD Movie (ISO 100-12800 (H:25600)
High Performance Operation
61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points)
6.0 fps for high continuous shooting
Intelligent viewfinder with approx. 100% coverage
3.2-type, approx.1.04m dot (3:2 wide) Clear View LCD II
iFCL metering with 63-zone dual-layer sensor
Shutter durability of 150,000 cycles
High end features
Silent & low vibration modes
Dual card slots (CF & SD)
High Dynamic Range (HDR) Mode
Multiple Exposures
Comparative Playback function
Improved durability & water and dust resistance
SPECIFICATIONS
Available Colours – Black
Megapixels – 22MP
Sensor Size – 36 x 24mm
ISO/Sensitivity – 100 – 25600
Autofocus Points – 61 points
Lens Mount – Canon
LCD Size – 3.2″
Liveview – Yes
Viewfinder – Optical TTL
Min Shutter Speed – 30 sec
Max Shutter Speed – 1/8000 sec
Continuous Shooting Speed – 6 fps
Self Timer – 10 sec, 2 sec
Metering – Centre-weighted, Spot, Evaluative, Partial
Video Resolution – Full HD 1080
Memory Type – Compact Flash
Connectivity – USB 2, HDMI, Mic Input, Wireless (optional)
Battery – LP-E6
Battery Type – Lithium-ion
Charger – Includes Li-Ion Charger
File Formats – AVI, RAW, H.264, MOV, MPEG-4
Dimensions – 152 x 116 x 76mm
Box Contents – Battery Pack LP-E6 .. Battery Charger LC-E6 .. AV Cable AVC-DC400ST .. Interface Cable IFC-200U .. Eyecup Eg .. Wide Strap EWEOS5DMKIII .. CR1616 Lithium Battery+

« Reply #109 on: March 01, 2012, 10:10 »
0
^^ I would just call it a bad joke!

grp_photo

« Reply #110 on: March 01, 2012, 12:50 »
0
I'm underwhelmed too! Especially as it seems that the new 5DIII will be more expensive than the 5DII (I bought the 5DII for 2200,- Euro including taxes shortly after it came out). I had the 7D and sold it because I didn't liked the autofocus also I really don't need 6fps maybe I should spare the money for the upgrade and trying to buy the 645D in the future ( I pretty much have all 645-lenses from the film-area so I would only need the body for the switch to digital medium-format). If I had any Nikon-lenses I would make the switch to Nikon now.

RT


« Reply #111 on: March 01, 2012, 12:59 »
0
What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?

22.3 Megapixel Full Frame CMOS sensor

DiG!C 5+ Image Processor

61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points)

6.0 fps for high continuous shooting

Multiple Exposures

All of these are an improvement over the 5D2, I'll very interested in the 'multiple exposure', by which I presume it's a digital version of what we could do in film by not advancing the frame.

Plus the HDR thing but I'll reserve judgement until I see it, personally I'm not a huge fan of HDR

« Reply #112 on: March 01, 2012, 13:08 »
0
if it's really only 22mp, i dont see myself upgrade from mark2 to mark3 any time soon. D800 is better choice imo.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 13:15 by dreamstock »

wut

« Reply #113 on: March 01, 2012, 13:08 »
0
It looks like it's going to be a hugely improved model regarding AF (really needed improvement), HI-ISO performance (I rarely need it, but it would be nice to be able to get full res ISO 800 shots accepted and not risk blurred images due to too low shutter speeds) and FPS (doubled). I think it definitely is a step in the right direction. The mpix race should be long over, the industry should focus on improving IQ, especially DR. Lenses can't handle higher resolutions, well 95% of lenses anyway, and most of them are 200mm+, that are rarely used for MS. And what's more important, no one pays more for images larger than 20.5 mpix or so.

Mpix used to be a lure for unknowledgeable amateurs that can't ask you anything beyond how many mpix does your camera have ;)

P.S. not to mention all the HW upgrades that are needed to process all that data (if resolution was doubled), extra HDD space, memory cards etc. And yes, it may not be worth 3+k, when you can get a 5D2 for way less than 2k or even better keep on using your good ol' 5d2. Why do you need to buy and buy new stuff all the time, even if you don't really need it (hey, it's a new model). To hell with this bloody consumerism! :)

grp_photo

« Reply #114 on: March 01, 2012, 13:10 »
0
What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?



Multiple Exposures

All of these are an improvement over the 5D2, I'll very interested in the 'multiple exposure', by which I presume it's a digital version of what we could do in film by not advancing the frame.

serious? really? You can do this fast and much more controlled in PS I wouldn't spend a cent more for this kind of feature.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #115 on: March 01, 2012, 13:17 »
0
What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?

22.3 Megapixel Full Frame CMOS sensor - Versus 21MPin the MII? Yawn

DiG!C 5+ Image Processor What's the benefit here? Yawn

61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points) I had a D300 with 51pt autofocus and it was nice but I don't miss it. Yawn

6.0 fps for high continuous shooting Don't need it and any pro that needs performance will get a 1DX. Yawn

Multiple Exposures This is worth $3K?

All of these are an improvement over the 5D2, I'll very interested in the 'multiple exposure', by which I presume it's a digital version of what we could do in film by not advancing the frame.

Plus the HDR thing but I'll reserve judgement until I see it, personally I'm not a huge fan of HDR

See above responses. Then go look at the D800 specs for $3K. 

« Reply #116 on: March 01, 2012, 13:22 »
0
It looks like it's going to be a hugely improved model regarding AF (really needed improvement), HI-ISO performance (I rarely need it, but it would be nice to be able to get full res ISO 800 shots accepted and not risk blurred images due to too low shutter speeds) and FPS (doubled). I think it definitely is a step in the right direction. The mpix race should be long over, the industry should focus on improving IQ, especially DR. Lenses can't handle higher resolutions, well 95% of lenses anyway, and most of them are 200mm+, that are rarely used for MS. And what's more important, no one pays more for images larger than 20.5 mpix or so.

Mpix used to be a lure for unknowledgeable amateurs that can't ask you anything beyond how many mpix does your camera have ;)

P.S. not to mention all the HW upgrades that are needed to process all that data (if resolution was doubled), extra HDD space, memory cards etc. And yes, it may not be worth 3+k, when you can get a 5D2 for way less than 2k or even better keep on using your good ol' 5d2. Why do you need to buy and buy new stuff all the time, even if you don't really need it (hey, it's a new model). To hell with this bloody consumerism! :)

I'd agree with that. My initial disappointment is tempered by the relief that I don't feel any incentive at all to upgrade my camera which is already more than good enough for almost any purpose I'm ever likely to have for it. When it breaks I'll just get it repaired and serviced.

« Reply #117 on: March 01, 2012, 13:44 »
0

Plus the HDR thing but I'll reserve judgement until I see it, personally I'm not a huge fan of HDR

I'm a huge fan, but only when it's done correctly.

« Reply #118 on: March 01, 2012, 14:00 »
0
I am pleased with the new features. Things I will pay for (compared to 5D2):
- better AF (and yes, I need it for an important part of my work!)
- better high ISO performance
- higher fps (again, useful for me)
- arguably better IQ (this I'll believe when I'll see it).

If I get the D800, then I'll get more megapixels and that's it. But I will miss:
- speed (AF - arguably, fps, also quite certain - the buffer will fill quickly and you'll shoot one RAW each half an hour)
- big drawback in file size. Sorry, I just can't cope with 75 MB RAW images. My shoots have anywhere from 100-300 (studio) to 2000-3000 (outdoor, travel) and I only shoot RAW. That's huge...
- arguably high iso performance because of difference in resolutions, mainly.

I wish Nikon would have the possibility to shoot RAW in smaller resolutions, like Canon has. Some mRaw, sRaw, whatever.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 14:21 by Tabimura »

« Reply #119 on: March 01, 2012, 14:38 »
0
I think that all of you are photographers :) Am I wrong?

For us cinematographers AVI, RAW in our industry worth at least 1500-2000$ just for that. So I hope that is true. If it is true I am buying. And if they improve any of this: mpix anti-aliasing, 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 video color sampling and rolling shutter reduced it will be revolution like MkII but we will see tomorow.

RT


« Reply #120 on: March 01, 2012, 15:33 »
0
What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?

22.3 Megapixel Full Frame CMOS sensor - Versus 21MPin the MII? Yawn

DiG!C 5+ Image Processor What's the benefit here? Yawn

61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points) I had a D300 with 51pt autofocus and it was nice but I don't miss it. Yawn

6.0 fps for high continuous shooting Don't need it and any pro that needs performance will get a 1DX. Yawn

Multiple Exposures This is worth $3K?

All of these are an improvement over the 5D2, I'll very interested in the 'multiple exposure', by which I presume it's a digital version of what we could do in film by not advancing the frame.

Plus the HDR thing but I'll reserve judgement until I see it, personally I'm not a huge fan of HDR

See above responses. Then go look at the D800 specs for $3K. 

I'm guessing that like me Canon weren't aware they had to design an upgrade that suited you personally, I was just pointing out the improvements over the existing 5D2, buy one, don't buy one, buy a Nikon I don't really care.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #121 on: March 01, 2012, 18:05 »
0
What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?

22.3 Megapixel Full Frame CMOS sensor - Versus 21MPin the MII? Yawn

DiG!C 5+ Image Processor What's the benefit here? Yawn

61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points) I had a D300 with 51pt autofocus and it was nice but I don't miss it. Yawn

6.0 fps for high continuous shooting Don't need it and any pro that needs performance will get a 1DX. Yawn

Multiple Exposures This is worth $3K?

All of these are an improvement over the 5D2, I'll very interested in the 'multiple exposure', by which I presume it's a digital version of what we could do in film by not advancing the frame.

Plus the HDR thing but I'll reserve judgement until I see it, personally I'm not a huge fan of HDR

See above responses. Then go look at the D800 specs for $3K. 

I'm guessing that like me Canon weren't aware they had to design an upgrade that suited you personally, I was just pointing out the improvements over the existing 5D2, buy one, don't buy one, buy a Nikon I don't really care.

I asked why I should not yawn, you responded pointing out some spectacular new features, I yawned. If you don't care, don't respond.

RT


« Reply #122 on: March 02, 2012, 07:40 »
0
What am I missing here that I should not be yawning about this?



Multiple Exposures

All of these are an improvement over the 5D2, I'll very interested in the 'multiple exposure', by which I presume it's a digital version of what we could do in film by not advancing the frame.

serious? really? You can do this fast and much more controlled in PS I wouldn't spend a cent more for this kind of feature.

Yes I was serious (although it doesn't look like they added it) but not for the reasons you're thinking, in the old days of film the ability to stop the film advancing and multiply expose the same frame meant that you could take a photo at a settings that were ordinarily impossible for the amount of light available without having to 'push' the film (therefore creating large amounts of grain) or compromise DoF or shutter speed.

You'll have heard of the sunny 16 rule whereby on a sunny day at f16 your shutter speed should match your film (ASA or ISO) rating, now imagine for whatever reason you need to apply those settings to the camera but you need to take the photo at night, being able to multiply expose the same frame of film until you've done it enough times to gather enough light for a correct exposure was the way you did it, you can't do that in digital using Photoshop or HDR because something has to compromise. I'm not the best at explaining things so I hope you understand what I mean.

Though if all you want to do is add the same person/object in the image at a different position then you're correct it's easier to do that now in PS, you could do that in film but you had to compensate by underexposing the film for the bits that weren't moving.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2012, 07:43 by RT »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
10146 Views
Last post February 22, 2007, 06:48
by CJPhoto
145 Replies
51099 Views
Last post September 18, 2008, 06:36
by Megabyzus
6 Replies
7359 Views
Last post September 05, 2008, 16:46
by dbajurin
26 Replies
26015 Views
Last post June 16, 2010, 19:04
by Kone
17 Replies
16985 Views
Last post August 10, 2012, 11:25
by traveler1116

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle