MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Cameras / Lenses => Photography Equipment => Canon => Topic started by: KB on March 02, 2012, 00:33
-
Dpreview spilled the beans at midnight, ET.
Press release:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/02/Canon-5D-Mark-III (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/02/Canon-5D-Mark-III)
Hands-on preview:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/02/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-preview (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/02/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-preview)
-
I'm nonplussed.
Its mostly tweaks to make it a better video camera, but as a still shooter there is little need to upgrade from the Mark II.
-
I knew the eye control was BS
-
You beat me to it :)
Official Canon Page
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Specifications (http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Specifications)
-
I knew the eye control was BS
too bad, that would have been nice.
-
Not worth it for most photographers-only, but for those who also shoot video, it's pretty much a must have upgrade. The 5D2's video just has too many compromises. Sounds like the 5D3 makes some substantial improvements (but at the cost of tripling the clip size -- of course!).
But I agree, all in all, not a very exciting announcement. This round goes to Nikon. ;D
-
A new flash to go with it!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/canon/announcements/new-canon-600ex-rt-speedlite-flash-powerhouse (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/canon/announcements/new-canon-600ex-rt-speedlite-flash-powerhouse)
-
The Nikon might look better on paper but the video image is full of aliasing and even some moire.
I'm not impressed by the 5D 3 for Video either, for stills its great. To bad they decided to charge as much as a video and still camera in one.
The lack of a swivel screen, lack of 60p at 1080 and the price will steer me away from it.
-
All this wait for that? Really considering switching to Nikon. Will see .....
-
I won't be buying it. Hopefully they'll announce a real upgrade soon.
-
So, does anyone have good info on Nikkor FX lenses compared to Canon lenses?
-
I think the autofocus system in the Mk III is the most interesting thing to me (I don't shoot video) but I don't see anything compelling me to dump my Mark II in the short term. Given the number of new items - new sensor, new shutter mechanism, etc. I'd certainly wait to let other users debug the glitches (my Mark II had to go back to Canon within a week for a fix, and I had waited until Jan 2009 before getting one). It does seem they were aiming mainly at video users though...
-
People here are giving it abit of a thumbs down.
I have a 5dMkII, I can't see anything to make me upgrade, but surely there are some positives to this new camera. Higher frame rate, better AF, better imaged quality, etc.
I'm surely not going to switch to nikon and buy 4 new lenses.
What is it missing with their offering ?
Less than 36MP
No Swivel screen
no 60fps at 1080
No eye control focus
-
Bad joke! not worth a carrot. The MP, race is over, the MII 21 MP, is more then enough for just about everything, I have even done billboard size with it. Even so, you would have thought they come up with something more then just video performance. Nah, poor choice.
Nikon isnt really much better, I also have the D3X and no way would I even consider the D800. Should I need more MP, then I go MF. Simple as that.
I recon both Canon and Nikon have shot themselves in the foot with these upgrades, MPs, just isnt enough, since we already have that.
-
Oh! Now I can buy 5Dmk2 with a calm heart!
-
we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.
-
As video guy not so impressed. At this moment Nikon D800 is better choice.
Very interesting is kit price Mk3 with 24-70 but just because of one lens I will not buy Mk3.
I am very dissapointed. Everything from the roumors what we expected to be in it are missing.
They didn't even put timelapse function witch you can find now in every single video camera.
-
If I didn't buy a 5D2 last summer this alone "This correction is based on Canon-created lens profiles, up to 29 of which can be downloaded and saved onto the camera. These profiles allow correction not only of lateral CA but also of the harder-to-fix axial CA" would almost make it worth the upgrade. I only use a couple of fast primes and CA is killing me, especially when I have to remove 3 differently coloured aberrations from the high contrast edges
-
What I failure! Canon, you missed us!
-
we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely. The XXXL, sales in micro are very few and far in between. Microstock photography is not on par with high flying advertising shoots nor RM photography.
-
we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely. The XXXL, sales in micro are very few and far in between. Microstock photography is not on par with high flying advertising shoots nor RM photography.
This is true, very lage size PPD sales are rare (much more often you'll see XXXL sub sales, ironically). The high resolution I'll rather have it for macrostock, RM or RF.
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
I saw some first hand shots of the D800 and man, that was no good, many complianed of a plasticky look and lots of noise above ISO, 800. Im not at all sure of Nikons choice, not this time. Also, they have just killed off their own flagship, the D3X. How clever is that?
-
All this wait for that? Really considering switching to Nikon. Will see .....
Ever considered switching to Hasselblad? The H4D-31 isn't so expensive ($14,000 with lens). I'm certainly toying with the idea, perhaps it's more work than it's worth, but the 5D Mark III is a bit underwhelming
-
I will see what will be with MK2 on eBay...
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
I saw some first hand shots of the D800 and man, that was no good, many complianed of a plasticky look and lots of noise above ISO, 800. Im not at all sure of Nikons choice, not this time. Also, they have just killed off their own flagship, the D3X. How clever is that?
I saw that too. Even at lower ISO some of the test shots had noise that resembled chunky point and shoot noise. I will need to find some RAW test shots and check those out.
Even if the D800 image quality isn't perfect, most people don't have expectations like the nit-picky levels of stock photography so the D800 should be a winner just on perception. And yes, Nikon killed the D3X with this move but it was inevitable. I, like most other people, asked why it was worth $7K? The answer clearly is that it wasn't.
-
It's nice to see that they brought some innovation to the flash system. That new Speedlite 600 looks pretty sweet.
-
I've been telling myself for the past 2 years that I'd hold off buying a MkII and wait for the MkIII - in the meantime buy lenses and lights if the itch to spend money on gear needs scratching.
Now the MkIII is out, am wondering if it's worth the upgrade - maybe keep the MkI and keep going with lens and light improvements?
-
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely.
You're wasting your breath, having read most the replies here and on the other thread it's clear that a lot of people are only interested in one thing - big MP numbers - forget the fact that Canon have taken an already good camera and improved on it's minor flaws, most aren't interested in the quality of the image or usability of the camera they just want big MP's, no doubt a few drive cheap cars with big engines ;)
-
we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely. The XXXL, sales in micro are very few and far in between. Microstock photography is not on par with high flying advertising shoots nor RM photography.
I'm always glad of the extra pixels in my 5D2: when shooting birds, 400mm often isn't enough and it's great to be able to crop in. :D
-
This is disaster for our expectations...
-
This is a super cool camera. Yes for microstock and in general stock photography, it is not a big upgrade from the 5d mkII, but for a wedding photographer this is really the perfect camera. Dual card slots - way improved AF- improved high iso IQ. Can't wish for anything more.
-
Here's some sample images using the Camera, from Canon:
http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/5dmk3/samples/index.html (http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/5dmk3/samples/index.html)
-
Oh! Now I can buy 5Dmk2 with a calm heart!
+1
-
hahaha canon missed the bus again !
on the other side, i'm not sold on the D800, they said it's not a replacement for the D700 so let's wait and see, it should be a matter of months before they officially announce the new D700/D300s replacements unless they decided to kill the D700.
and yes, it's depressing to notice everybody is now ranting and raving about D800's 36MP resolution, it's still a poorman's camera compare to Hasselblad's 60MP !
-
All this wait for that? Really considering switching to Nikon. Will see .....
Ever considered switching to Hasselblad? The H4D-31 isn't so expensive ($14,000 with lens). I'm certainly toying with the idea, perhaps it's more work than it's worth, but the 5D Mark III is a bit underwhelming
Yes I was thinking that too but I don't like the fact that the camera is so slow and heavy ...... and its not only the price of the body, but also all the lenses. However it is a choice worth considering. Good thing is that you just simply know you have the best camera in your hands. The 5D could be good for video and outdoor fast shoots ......
-
Here's some sample images using the Camera, from Canon:
[url]http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/5dmk3/samples/index.html[/url] ([url]http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/5dmk3/samples/index.html[/url])
the sample at ISO6400 clearly shows the limits of the new sensor but i think it can produce good pictures at ISO 800 or ISO1600 by night.
6400 is out of question and 3200 maybe ok during daylight.
-
Yes I was thinking that too but I don't like the fact that the camera is so slow and heavy
actually they should make them more heavy, say 2kg for body-only, so female photographers will have a hard time.
-
All this wait for that? Really considering switching to Nikon. Will see .....
Ever considered switching to Hasselblad? The H4D-31 isn't so expensive ($14,000 with lens). I'm certainly toying with the idea, perhaps it's more work than it's worth, but the 5D Mark III is a bit underwhelming
Yes I was thinking that too but I don't like the fact that the camera is so slow and heavy ...... and its not only the price of the body, but also all the lenses. However it is a choice worth considering. Good thing is that you just simply know you have the best camera in your hands. The 5D could be good for video and outdoor fast shoots ......
I figure that since I need 2 bodies anyhow (for a back-up) one could just as well be something different so that when I need something different I'd have it. I currently shoot with 2 5D Mark II's, but switching one out for a hasselblad might be smart. If I need the speed and versatility I could use the 5D and if it breaks I'd have the Hassy to limp along with and make due for the rest of the shoot. In shoots where the hassy shines, I could leave the 5D on the video rig or simply as a backup...
I'm still unsure, I've just been thinking about medium format for a long time and was sort of holding out for the 5D Mark III. As it looks, the 5D isn't a medium format competitor.
-
I have to say, I'm very impressed with high iso sample shots, especially the bride and the tiger, on canon website. It's kinda 1.5-2 stops better than my 5D2, I'd say.
-
No matter how good any camera is with high ISO, its still a gamble getting it past the inspection, especially at SS, DT and FT.
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking?
Interestingly, someone calculated that the price in Yen is identical to the price the 5D II came out at. But due to the strong Yen, the price is higher in most other currencies.
-
I have to say, I'm very impressed with high iso sample shots, especially the bride and the tiger, on canon website. It's kinda 1.5-2 stops better than my 5D2, I'd say.
Image 1, at ISO 800, looks horrible. There's an enormous amount of color noise in the ice. It looks like what I'd expect from the 5D2 at 1600 or maybe even 3200. Hopefully that's an aberration of some sort. The similar one at 6400 has had so much noise reduction applied that it looks smooth in many places.
Even the tiger one wasn't too impressive, but much better than the first two. Based on that it looks like a 1 stop ISO improvement at best; hopefully I'm wrong.
-
I have to say, I'm very impressed with high iso sample shots, especially the bride and the tiger, on canon website. It's kinda 1.5-2 stops better than my 5D2, I'd say.
on the contrary i'm not that impressed and they used the best primes in F1.4 and F1.8 to keep the ISO down so it sounds a bit tricky to me, there's only one sample shot by night and it's not at all usable for the quality required on stock agencies.
-
Really not sure whether to get the Mark III or the d800! ???
-
I have to say, I'm very impressed with high iso sample shots, especially the bride and the tiger, on canon website. It's kinda 1.5-2 stops better than my 5D2, I'd say.
on the contrary i'm not that impressed and they used the best primes in F1.4 and F1.8 to keep the ISO down so it sounds a bit tricky to me, there's only one sample shot by night and it's not at all usable for the quality required on stock agencies.
What are you sniffing? I am talking about the tiger image taken at iso 3200, f/8, with a 400mm f/2.8L + 2x TC. And the image of a bride, taken also at iso 3200, f/7.1, with a 50mm f/1.2.
The tiger image looks absolutely great taking into the account the combo long tele + TC. I think you can't get anything better than this in the said situation. Also the bride image looks great in my view, and I'm guessing about 1.5 - 2 stops in iso performance above 5D2.
The aurora borealis photos are poor choices to display a camera's performance, especially since the high iso shot is taken at f/2.8 - wth...
-
http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-5d-mark-iii-hands/MTA3ODU3MjU_A (http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-5d-mark-iii-hands/MTA3ODU3MjU_A)
-
[url]http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-5d-mark-iii-hands/MTA3ODU3MjU_A[/url] ([url]http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-5d-mark-iii-hands/MTA3ODU3MjU_A[/url])
Thanks, that was interesting. The guy showed the mode dial lock to be at the top, but in the leaked pics that switch is labeled "on" and "off". The one where the power switch is located in the 5D2 is labeled "Lock >>". So I don't know what to believe. It doesn't really matter, of course, but I do hope that the on/off switch remains where it is in the 5D2.
I'm still not convinced about the ISO gain. The samples in this "first impression" didn't impress me, either. I'm assuming a 1-stop improvement; I hope it's there.
So they removed the "999" limitation on shots remaining ... and maxed it at "1999"? what?! And a "rate" button? Come on. They added a bunch of fluff that is totally worthless (like the in-camera raw processing, in-camera HDR idiocy, etc.). A lot of stuff I was hoping for isn't there. But, oh, well. I'm not going to move to Nikon, that's for sure.
ETA: Ok, this one clearly explains it:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/02/canon-announces-eos-5d-mark-iii-22-3mp-full-frame-sensor-6-fps/ (http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/02/canon-announces-eos-5d-mark-iii-22-3mp-full-frame-sensor-6-fps/)
The mode dial lock is in the center of the mode dial; the power on/off switch is behind it. So they did move it up there, but left the wheel lock (or whatever it's called) where it always has been.
-
Image 1, at ISO 800, looks horrible. There's an enormous amount of color noise in the ice. It looks like what I'd expect from the 5D2 at 1600 or maybe even 3200. Hopefully that's an aberration of some sort. The similar one at 6400 has had so much noise reduction applied that it looks smooth in many places.
Even the tiger one wasn't too impressive, but much better than the first two. Based on that it looks like a 1 stop ISO improvement at best; hopefully I'm wrong.
Completely agree. That 6400 aurora sample is terrible. The details have been completely eroded into a blurry, fuzzy mess.
-
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely.
You're wasting your breath, having read most the replies here and on the other thread it's clear that a lot of people are only interested in one thing - big MP numbers - forget the fact that Canon have taken an already good camera and improved on it's minor flaws, most aren't interested in the quality of the image or usability of the camera they just want big MP's, no doubt a few drive cheap cars with big engines ;)
I don't think the IQ will beat the Sigma SD1 and that's getting a big price cut. I only want more mp's to be able to crop and still sell at big sizes. The other minor improvements don't make much difference to me. I'm happy with the MKII auto focus, 1fps is all I need and the video doesn't look much differnet. I hardly ever use above 400 iso.
-
If I didn't buy a 5D2 last summer this alone "This correction is based on Canon-created lens profiles, up to 29 of which can be downloaded and saved onto the camera. These profiles allow correction not only of lateral CA but also of the harder-to-fix axial CA" would almost make it worth the upgrade. I only use a couple of fast primes and CA is killing me, especially when I have to remove 3 differently coloured aberrations from the high contrast edges
You can use DXO to convert raws, it will do all the chromatic aberration correction for you automatically.
-
We can say all we want about disappointing news, but I think right now this 5DmkIII might be the best camera below medium format, as far as image quality is concerned. I need a second camera as a backup, so I'll be buying this new 5DIII and keep my mkII as a backup. Even if Canon would come up with a 40mp camera half-way this year, I cannot believe these 40 million pixels on a same size sensor will provide equal image quality.
-
Really not sure whether to get the Mark III or the d800! ???
no idea.
let's wait for the D700/D300s replacements and see what's going on, they should be announced in a few months hopefully.
-
I have to say, I'm very impressed with high iso sample shots, especially the bride and the tiger, on canon website. It's kinda 1.5-2 stops better than my 5D2, I'd say.
on the contrary i'm not that impressed and they used the best primes in F1.4 and F1.8 to keep the ISO down so it sounds a bit tricky to me, there's only one sample shot by night and it's not at all usable for the quality required on stock agencies.
What are you sniffing? I am talking about the tiger image taken at iso 3200, f/8, with a 400mm f/2.8L + 2x TC. And the image of a bride, taken also at iso 3200, f/7.1, with a 50mm f/1.2.
The tiger image looks absolutely great taking into the account the combo long tele + TC. I think you can't get anything better than this in the said situation. Also the bride image looks great in my view, and I'm guessing about 1.5 - 2 stops in iso performance above 5D2.
The aurora borealis photos are poor choices to display a camera's performance, especially since the high iso shot is taken at f/2.8 - wth...
i was talking about the Aurora in iso6400 and on the contrary i think it's a good choice to show what the camera can do by night !
of course it would have been better to snap night portraits, night landscapes in a city etc but from that photo i can already say that iso6400 is not usable and probably iso3200 isn't much better.
-
We can say all we want about disappointing news, but I think right now this 5DmkIII might be the best camera below medium format, as far as image quality is concerned. I need a second camera as a backup, so I'll be buying this new 5DIII and keep my mkII as a backup. Even if Canon would come up with a 40mp camera half-way this year, I cannot believe these 40 million pixels on a same size sensor will provide equal image quality.
the trend seems to be about high-MP sensors which are good only at low-ISOs and low/medium MP sensors designed for high-ISOs.
it would be strange for canon to leave the D800 as king of the hill but after all both canon and nikon are making billions with compact and entry-level cameras at the moment rather than with top of the line DSLRs.
-
Now that I think about it, Canon may be playing it smart here. Maybe.
I'd bet the 5DMIII is more of a replacement for both the 7D and 5DMII. Is there a need for a next generation 7D at this point?
If Canon sits on the sidelines for a year they can watch how well the D800 does. If it's a huge success (which I bet it will be) they can start working on a competitor while sprinkling some rumors around about a high MP model (4D? or whatever) to keep Canon people hanging on while they build it. Then in another year+ they can release a different higher MP model.
-
we microstockers need pixels! i will consider sell my 7d and buy d800 then make the 5d2 the backup machine.
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely. The XXXL, sales in micro are very few and far in between. Microstock photography is not on par with high flying advertising shoots nor RM photography.
I'm doing just fine in the RM and advertising markets with a 12 MP camera...
-
I like the upgrades the Mark III offers, the AF, fps, 100% viewfinder, image quality but I'm having trouble justifying the $3500 price tag. The AF on the Mark II is poor I think we can all agree on that, but do I want to spend $3500 to replace that, not at the moment.
-
I like the upgrades the Mark III offers, the AF, fps, 100% viewfinder, image quality but I'm having trouble justifying the $3500 price tag. The AF on the Mark II is poor I think we can all agree on that, but do I want to spend $3500 to replace that, not at the moment.
I just had an email from Wex offering me the chance to pre-order the 5D3 for the price of £2999, which according to XE is $4,749.80.
-
I think the thing that bugs me is that they added things like picture styles, HDR, and other kiddie cam crap (OMG a RATE button) to a camera that was previously a more professional tool. Its like they are shifting markets for the 5D, and not in a good direction. How likely is it that someone who wants to be able to rate their images in camera will shell out $4299 for a 5D III with lens?
-
I think the thing that bugs me is that they added things like picture styles, HDR, and other kiddie cam crap (OMG a RATE button) to a camera that was previously a more professional tool. Its like they are shifting markets for the 5D, and not in a good direction. How likely is it that someone who wants to be able to rate their images in camera will shell out $4299 for a 5D III with lens?
Regarding the rate button, I gather from dpreview's blurb that this is targeting pros who use Lightroom as the rating info is read by Lightroom. The idea is you make your selects and "maybes" on the camera and LR keeps that info
-
I think the thing that bugs me is that they added things like picture styles, HDR, and other kiddie cam crap (OMG a RATE button) to a camera that was previously a more professional tool. Its like they are shifting markets for the 5D, and not in a good direction. How likely is it that someone who wants to be able to rate their images in camera will shell out $4299 for a 5D III with lens?
Regarding the rate button, I gather from dpreview's blurb that this is targeting pros who use Lightroom as the rating info is read by Lightroom. The idea is you make your selects and "maybes" on the camera and LR keeps that info
Don't pros use photoshop ?
-
I don't get rating photos anyway. Can't I just look at them and determine which ones are the good ones?
-
How likely is it that someone who wants to be able to rate their images in camera will shell out $4299 for a 5D III with lens?
_o/
I'm a pro, and some times on a comissioned shoot I have some spare time to look at the images. It would be nice to "tag" the images with a rating so I can easily find them on DPP.
-
I think the "problem" isn't that the mk III isn't good. All the complaining exist because the mk II was SO GOOD! (it's hard to improve on something that is almost perfect)
-
As we can see Canon easy goes on "kiddie cam" side... Usual that was Olympus place...
Also, I like Olympus, they have excellent optics, IS in camera body, the best sensor cleaning and other good things...
So now is right moment to see Olympus full frame camera (E-7) with good price to win from shadow!!! ::) :P
-
I think the "problem" isn't that the mk III isn't good. All the complaining exist because the mk II was SO GOOD! (it's hard to improve on something that is almost perfect)
Less price, more megapixels, one step up in image quality, something about 60fps on fullHD, and some other things...
Probably then it can be SO GOOD again...
-
I think the "problem" isn't that the mk III isn't good. All the complaining exist because the mk II was SO GOOD! (it's hard to improve on something that is almost perfect)
I think the complaining falls into two large groups. One group looks at the 22MP and thinks that isn't enough (they either don't care about IQ that much, or think they can have their extra MPs and still get great IQ). The other group, the one I'm in, is disappointed that there weren't some features added that "should have" been. I was really hoping for a built-in time lapse feature (I don't like carrying around an intervalometer), and a bigger improvement on the video side (e.g., 4:2:2).
From what I've read, I think the improvements in moire, along with (supposedly) a cleaner encoding process, hopefully will be enough to see a visible improvement on the video side. On the photo side, there is some ISO improvement (anything will be welcomed), and the new auto focus system may come in handy at times (I generally have had no problems with the 5D2's focusing, but that's due to the kind of images I usually shoot).
So, I'm slightly disappointed, but pretty sure if I get it I'll love it. I'll just have to forget about how much money it'd cost ....
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
Yeah it's bad, but not nearly as bad as the new lenses. 24 2.8 IS and 24-70 2.8 IS cost more than double compared to their predecessors, while the 28 2.8 IS's price more than quadrupled. All that because of a new design and added IS?!? :o Because build quality is more or less the same, primes did not get L build quality, no weather seals etc. I don't care about those lenses, what worries me is what the new 50 1.4 IS is going to cost. 900 EUR or 1800 EUR more than the L version. I'd like to get a replacement for my Sigma 50 1.4, focusing is just so unreliable and it misses just slightly so there's no way you can notice it while you're shooting (it doesn't hunt either) and it's hard to spot it on the camera's display unless you zoom at 100% every single time (that is out of the question anyway). Canon's current 50 1.4 just don't have a decent enough IQ, especially up to f2.2, it just can't compare with the Sigma, bokeh isn't nearly as soft and contrast aren't really there, on par either
-
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely.
You're wasting your breath, having read most the replies here and on the other thread it's clear that a lot of people are only interested in one thing - big MP numbers - forget the fact that Canon have taken an already good camera and improved on it's minor flaws, most aren't interested in the quality of the image or usability of the camera they just want big MP's, no doubt a few drive cheap cars with big engines ;)
Exactly I wrote that in the rumor thread but everybody ignored me. Yeah, like Mustangs, Camaros and similar American muscle cars (or Corvettes etc), lots of power, no breaks, pathetic suspension, only fast in a straight line. But they usually look good, I'll give them that, some are stunning actually.
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
Yeah it's bad, but not nearly as bad as the new lenses. 24 2.8 IS and 24-70 2.8 IS cost more than double compared to their predecessors, while the 28 2.8 IS's price more than quadrupled. All that because of a new design and added IS?!?
I'm pretty sure that the appreciation of the Yen by about 50% in the last 5 years might have something to do with that, too. No one here seems to be able to understand that, though. ;D
-
If I didn't buy a 5D2 last summer this alone "This correction is based on Canon-created lens profiles, up to 29 of which can be downloaded and saved onto the camera. These profiles allow correction not only of lateral CA but also of the harder-to-fix axial CA" would almost make it worth the upgrade. I only use a couple of fast primes and CA is killing me, especially when I have to remove 3 differently coloured aberrations from the high contrast edges
You can use DXO to convert raws, it will do all the chromatic aberration correction for you automatically.
Wow, really? There's 2 types of CA, lateral and longitudinal. Not sure which is which, but only one can get removed with a couple of clicks in PS and that is the one that doesn't cause problems to me. So are you sure it just gets removed, all the contrast edges loose coloration? It really sounds too good to be true. I'll give it a try if that's the case. Tnx for the tip
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
Yeah it's bad, but not nearly as bad as the new lenses. 24 2.8 IS and 24-70 2.8 IS cost more than double compared to their predecessors, while the 28 2.8 IS's price more than quadrupled. All that because of a new design and added IS?!?
I'm pretty sure that the appreciation of the Yen by about 50% in the last 5 years might have something to do with that, too. No one here seems to be able to understand that, though. ;D
Yeah, but that would affect prices across the board, not just those of the new models. And 5D3 should cost at least 4,5k EUR then (it was 3k when it was announced if I remember correctly).
-
And nobody mentioned the $3,499? What is Canon smoking? I'll hold onto the 5DMII and will keep an eye on the D800.
Yeah it's bad, but not nearly as bad as the new lenses. 24 2.8 IS and 24-70 2.8 IS cost more than double compared to their predecessors, while the 28 2.8 IS's price more than quadrupled. All that because of a new design and added IS?!?
I'm pretty sure that the appreciation of the Yen by about 50% in the last 5 years might have something to do with that, too. No one here seems to be able to understand that, though. ;D
Yeah, but that would affect prices across the board, not just those of the new models. And 5D3 should cost at least 4,5k EUR then (it was 3k when it was announced if I remember correctly).
That's a good point about current prices of the older models. So clearly that isn't the only factor in the 5D3 price (not to mention, as you did, the outrageously high prices of the new lenses). But I think it is a big factor.
I think I read somewhere that the dual CA correction feature applied only to JPGs. Been reading a lot, though, so maybe that was something else ....
-
I have yet to see some 2-clicks method to remove bokeh fringing.
-
I like the upgrades the Mark III offers, the AF, fps, 100% viewfinder, image quality but I'm having trouble justifying the $3500 price tag. The AF on the Mark II is poor I think we can all agree on that, but do I want to spend $3500 to replace that, not at the moment.
I think that about sums it up for me.
And while I get what some people are saying about the currency changes, the bottom line is it's still $1,000 more. It doesn't matter what the reason is. I'm more willing to bet Canon felt they underpriced the MII and are trying to gouge us a bit to make a better profit.
And I'm not seeing anything about it, for now, that can make me more money over my MII. But that's me. I'm sure a lot of people will buy it but I don't quite see it having anywhere near the same "gotta have it" sales demand as the MI and MII. I'm guessing the early adopters and people waiting for reviews will buy it but sales will taper off quickly after a couple months.
-
I'm a pro, and some times on a comissioned shoot I have some spare time to look at the images. It would be nice to "tag" the images with a rating so I can easily find them on DPP.
Meh, you are going to look at them all at 100% anyways to check focus on subjects, right? I just don't think you can tell enough from the camera's screen to decide, and if you are going to review them all anyways, you are wasting time.
Regarding the megapixel comments, I'm perfectly ok with the number of pixels, but if you are going to run the same pixel density, I expect vast improvement in light sensitivity and dynamic range, which this doesn't really appear to have based on the sample images. Look at the shot of the tiger at the end, looks awful and flat.
Edit:
Just found the samples over at DPReview, this is ISO 6400: http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/1779794.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1330733134&Signature=DtppWGChUgqH4NLhM1K3YKvq6Lk%3d (http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/1779794.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1330733134&Signature=DtppWGChUgqH4NLhM1K3YKvq6Lk%3d)
That's not bad, and reduces well, so maybe they did make some good strides on the image quality side of things. I'd like to see some RAW files though.
Here is the DPReview sample gallery:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples (http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples)
-
I don't think the 5D 3 is really that bad. It improves on all the areas that the mk2 is weak in, except sensor cleaning. Existing mk2 owners shouldn't be unhappy, because the result will probably mean that the value of their cameras remains high, and that there's not an overwhelming need to upgrade.
In terms of price, its almost like Canon is leaving room for the Mk2 to remain in the lineup as an entry level FF camera, maybe at a slightly reduced price.
-
I was really hoping for a built-in time lapse feature (I don't like carrying around an intervalometer), and a bigger improvement on the video side (e.g., 4:2:2).
Really agree with this one. I don't get why they don't add it, although it should be a simple firmware upgrade to allow for it.
I also don't get whey they don't have built in GPS. Their cheaper cameras like the S100 have it and I would think it to be very useful for journalistic photography.
-
How good is the timelapse function in the D800? I don't mind having to use an intervalometer but it would be nice for the times when I have forgotten to put it in my camera bag.
-
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely.
You're wasting your breath, having read most the replies here and on the other thread it's clear that a lot of people are only interested in one thing - big MP numbers - forget the fact that Canon have taken an already good camera and improved on it's minor flaws, most aren't interested in the quality of the image or usability of the camera they just want big MP's, no doubt a few drive cheap cars with big engines ;)
Exactly I wrote that in the rumor thread but everybody ignored me. Yeah, like Mustangs, Camaros and similar American muscle cars (or Corvettes etc), lots of power, no breaks, pathetic suspension, only fast in a straight line. But they usually look good, I'll give them that, some are stunning actually.
I don't want any of the stuff that most other people seem to want, like higher FPS, lower noise at high ISO, improved focusing. There are many times when more mp's would be useful. Single frame panoramas for example. I live near the sea and it's virtually impossible to make a decent panorama of waves using stitching programs. With more mp's, I could crop a single frame and still have a decent size image.
Perhaps people that want all the extra gizmos are like those that pimp their ride? I would be quite happy with a maximum 400 iso, 1fps, MKII auto focus and only aperture priority and manual. The only reason I would want to upgrade the MKII is for more mp's.
-
I'm a pro, and some times on a comissioned shoot I have some spare time to look at the images. It would be nice to "tag" the images with a rating so I can easily find them on DPP.
Meh, you are going to look at them all at 100% anyways to check focus on subjects, right? I just don't think you can tell enough from the camera's screen to decide, and if you are going to review them all anyways, you are wasting time.
We have propably a different workflow. I usually first check images for artistic qualities at a size that fits on my screen (DPP: Quick Check -> Fit to Window). After I have made my ratings I check the highest rated images if they are technically (Sharpness) sound.
If I would first check the sharpness of each image it would take forever if there are hundreds of raw images. Much easier to choose the ten best and mark them with a rating and after that hope they are sharp. If they are not, I'll check ones with four stars.
-
I'm sure a lot of people will buy it but I don't quite see it having anywhere near the same "gotta have it" sales demand as the MI and MII. I'm guessing the early adopters and people waiting for reviews will buy it but sales will taper off quickly after a couple months.
It's always like that, they wait for the suckers to pay premium (they overprice it) and after 3 months or so, they lower the price to a normal, realistic price.
-
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely.
You're wasting your breath, having read most the replies here and on the other thread it's clear that a lot of people are only interested in one thing - big MP numbers - forget the fact that Canon have taken an already good camera and improved on it's minor flaws, most aren't interested in the quality of the image or usability of the camera they just want big MP's, no doubt a few drive cheap cars with big engines ;)
Exactly I wrote that in the rumor thread but everybody ignored me. Yeah, like Mustangs, Camaros and similar American muscle cars (or Corvettes etc), lots of power, no breaks, pathetic suspension, only fast in a straight line. But they usually look good, I'll give them that, some are stunning actually.
I don't want any of the stuff that most other people seem to want, like higher FPS, lower noise at high ISO, improved focusing. There are many times when more mp's would be useful. Single frame panoramas for example. I live near the sea and it's virtually impossible to make a decent panorama of waves using stitching programs. With more mp's, I could crop a single frame and still have a decent size image.
Perhaps people that want all the extra gizmos are like those that pimp their ride? I would be quite happy with a maximum 400 iso, 1fps, MKII auto focus and only aperture priority and manual. The only reason I would want to upgrade the MKII is for more mp's.
Right! me neither. Never go beyond ISO 400, not the slightest interested in high ISO, low light or whatever, nor fps. I want cameras not toys, gadgets, etc. I already have all the camera bodies I can get, I even and out of pure investment reasons, got the Leica S2 with lenses.
Today, the only thing which can get me going is first class optics, now that is what I think Canon should have done, instead of this toy they should have launched a few new L-optics.
best.
-
I am not disappointed with the update as it means i can keep using my beloved mark ii for longer .yes i would love some of the new features especially with the focus, the the price tag doesn't justify an upgrade. I think Nikon people are more impressed with the d800 (admittedly me too) lets wait and see if the image quality is really superior to mark ii. but it will be interesting to see what magic lantern people can do with the new camera as at least processor wise it looks like a better camera i guess.
-
How good is the timelapse function in the D800? I don't mind having to use an intervalometer but it would be nice for the times when I have forgotten to put it in my camera bag.
One of the big advantages of the Canon is that the way the remote trigger is implemented is that you can do bulb ramping for time-lapse when you have long transitions from day to night.
On the 5D II half the time I'm actually using the intervalometer in a way where I'm just using the camera in continuous shooting mode with long exposures. For example in this clip: Tokyo in Timelapse (http://vimeo.com/37790190) only about 2 scenes are actually using a timer setting on the intervalometer, the rest are exposures of 0.5-1.5 seconds shot continuously. If you don't actually have something to do bulb ramping, manually adjusting exposure times is much easier if you're using an external intervalometer rather than the built-in one.
In practice, even if an intervalometer is built in, I'd probably still use a remote trigger most of the time. The real issue with the D800s for timelapse though is just the file size. You don't need that much extra resolution, but it is nice to be able to get the benefit of shooting in RAW, particularly for adjusting white-balance in changing light conditions - without any sRAW setting, its just a massive amount of data to handle without any benefit.
-
I loved the clip Holgs!
-
How good is the timelapse function in the D800? I don't mind having to use an intervalometer but it would be nice for the times when I have forgotten to put it in my camera bag.
One of the big advantages of the Canon is that the way the remote trigger is implemented is that you can do bulb ramping for time-lapse when you have long transitions from day to night.
On the 5D II half the time I'm actually using the intervalometer in a way where I'm just using the camera in continuous shooting mode with long exposures. For example in this clip: Tokyo in Timelapse ([url]http://vimeo.com/37790190[/url]) only about 2 scenes are actually using a timer setting on the intervalometer, the rest are exposures of 0.5-1.5 seconds shot continuously. If you don't actually have something to do bulb ramping, manually adjusting exposure times is much easier if you're using an external intervalometer rather than the built-in one.
In practice, even if an intervalometer is built in, I'd probably still use a remote trigger most of the time. The real issue with the D800s for timelapse though is just the file size. You don't need that much extra resolution, but it is nice to be able to get the benefit of shooting in RAW, particularly for adjusting white-balance in changing light conditions - without any sRAW setting, its just a massive amount of data to handle without any benefit.
Yep! brillant work Holgs, really nice and professionally done. Jeez! you should be doing commercials instead of stills. :)
-
Haha thanks guys! Timelapse has become a bit of an addiction at the moment, but its adds a bit of variety from shooting stills.
-
In terms of price, its almost like Canon is leaving room for the Mk2 to remain in the lineup as an entry level FF camera, maybe at a slightly reduced price.
I think that's exactly right. I have read reports that the MkII's price will be reduced (next week, in fact), and that it will remain in the Canon lineup.
-
I was really hoping for a built-in time lapse feature (I don't like carrying around an intervalometer), and a bigger improvement on the video side (e.g., 4:2:2).
Really agree with this one. I don't get why they don't add it, although it should be a simple firmware upgrade to allow for it.
I also don't get whey they don't have built in GPS. Their cheaper cameras like the S100 have it and I would think it to be very useful for journalistic photography.
I think it's all about being able to sell the add-ons. It's true of an intervalometer, a GPS, and wireless flash control. A movable LCD panel, though, can't be added on. And IIRC they do have that on one of their lower end dSLRs, so I'm disappointed they didn't consider it worthy for this. Maybe it adds too much weight, but there are times when it certainly would be useful for me.
-
We have propably a different workflow. I usually first check images for artistic qualities at a size that fits on my screen (DPP: Quick Check -> Fit to Window). After I have made my ratings I check the highest rated images if they are technically (Sharpness) sound.
If I would first check the sharpness of each image it would take forever if there are hundreds of raw images. Much easier to choose the ten best and mark them with a rating and after that hope they are sharp. If they are not, I'll check ones with four stars.
I'm using Bridge and ACR, I select all the images from the shoot in Bridge, then open them all at once in ACR. I run through them, marking blinks, ugly expressions, etc as one star (or five if I find something fantasitc), and hit done. Then I select No Ratings in Bridge, open all in ACR again, select all and right click in the image to set it at 100% (which sets them all at 100%). Then I just run through them again real quick, navigating around the image a bit if I'm not sure on focus, and mark anything iffy a two star. It takes maybe 20 or 30 minutes or so to do a quick pass on 200 or so images.
-
I think it's all about being able to sell the add-ons. It's true of an intervalometer, a GPS, and wireless flash control. A movable LCD panel, though, can't be added on. And IIRC they do have that on one of their lower end dSLRs, so I'm disappointed they didn't consider it worthy for this. Maybe it adds too much weight, but there are times when it certainly would be useful for me.
Could be a weather sealing issue of some kind. The Olympus E series have a smaller screen, but it can be pulled out and rotated completely around. It is actually extremely useful for composing low and high angle shots, etc.
-
Wow, really? There's 2 types of CA, lateral and longitudinal. Not sure which is which, but only one can get removed with a couple of clicks in PS and that is the one that doesn't cause problems to me. So are you sure it just gets removed, all the contrast edges loose coloration? It really sounds too good to be true. I'll give it a try if that's the case. Tnx for the tip
I'm pretty sure (make it 90%) that DXO removes longitudinal CA as well from lenses that are profiled. And it should do it on jpgs and not only raw. I suggest you to download the trial version and see if it works for you from www.dxo.com (http://www.dxo.com). But prepare yourself for a bumpy ride, the UI is less than stellar and it's very buggy especially on Mac. But the IQ is fantastic.
-
And the latest ACR does it even better.
-
Haha thanks guys! Timelapse has become a bit of an addiction at the moment, but its adds a bit of variety from shooting stills.
It's stunning! It really gives the feeling of the city and left me scratching my head several times asking "where did he put the camera?"
How did you get the shots on the railway? :)
-
Wow, really? There's 2 types of CA, lateral and longitudinal. Not sure which is which, but only one can get removed with a couple of clicks in PS and that is the one that doesn't cause problems to me. So are you sure it just gets removed, all the contrast edges loose coloration? It really sounds too good to be true. I'll give it a try if that's the case. Tnx for the tip
I'm pretty sure (make it 90%) that DXO removes longitudinal CA as well from lenses that are profiled. And it should do it on jpgs and not only raw. I suggest you to download the trial version and see if it works for you from [url=http://www.dxo.com]www.dxo.com[/url] ([url]http://www.dxo.com[/url]). But prepare yourself for a bumpy ride, the UI is less than stellar and it's very buggy especially on Mac. But the IQ is fantastic.
And the latest ACR does it even better.
Tnx guys, I'll try both
-
Wow, really? There's 2 types of CA, lateral and longitudinal. Not sure which is which, but only one can get removed with a couple of clicks in PS and that is the one that doesn't cause problems to me. So are you sure it just gets removed, all the contrast edges loose coloration? It really sounds too good to be true. I'll give it a try if that's the case. Tnx for the tip
I'm pretty sure (make it 90%) that DXO removes longitudinal CA as well from lenses that are profiled. And it should do it on jpgs and not only raw. I suggest you to download the trial version and see if it works for you from [url=http://www.dxo.com]www.dxo.com[/url] ([url]http://www.dxo.com[/url]). But prepare yourself for a bumpy ride, the UI is less than stellar and it's very buggy especially on Mac. But the IQ is fantastic.
And the latest ACR does it even better.
Tnx guys, I'll try both
I may be doing something wrong, but I've tried both and both can remove CA in some areas, but then it becomes visible on areas that wasn't before the adjustments. I talked about that on another forum a while back and ppl said the kind of CA that troubles me, just can't be removed easily with software, you just have to go through dozens of selections and then selective color adjustments. If it was so easy to remove it, no one would really care about it (those that PP photos don't count since max IQ obviously doesn't matter to them). It's like with noise, there's always a trade off (you loose details, sharpness). I'll just have to keep on doing it manually :(
-
Wrong! microstockers only, do not need tons of pixels, youre uploading JPGs, and any 12MP, cam will do nicely.
You're wasting your breath, having read most the replies here and on the other thread it's clear that a lot of people are only interested in one thing - big MP numbers - forget the fact that Canon have taken an already good camera and improved on it's minor flaws, most aren't interested in the quality of the image or usability of the camera they just want big MP's, no doubt a few drive cheap cars with big engines ;)
Exactly I wrote that in the rumor thread but everybody ignored me. Yeah, like Mustangs, Camaros and similar American muscle cars (or Corvettes etc), lots of power, no breaks, pathetic suspension, only fast in a straight line. But they usually look good, I'll give them that, some are stunning actually.
I don't want any of the stuff that most other people seem to want, like higher FPS, lower noise at high ISO, improved focusing. There are many times when more mp's would be useful. Single frame panoramas for example. I live near the sea and it's virtually impossible to make a decent panorama of waves using stitching programs. With more mp's, I could crop a single frame and still have a decent size image.
Perhaps people that want all the extra gizmos are like those that pimp their ride? I would be quite happy with a maximum 400 iso, 1fps, MKII auto focus and only aperture priority and manual. The only reason I would want to upgrade the MKII is for more mp's.
Right! me neither. Never go beyond ISO 400, not the slightest interested in high ISO, low light or whatever, nor fps. I want cameras not toys, gadgets, etc. I already have all the camera bodies I can get, I even and out of pure investment reasons, got the Leica S2 with lenses.
Today, the only thing which can get me going is first class optics, now that is what I think Canon should have done, instead of this toy they should have launched a few new L-optics.
best.
Im solid Nikon since the early 60's and owned just about everything in every format from spy cameras at 8MM to 11 x 14 field cameras. The Mk2 was a benchmark Camera no doubt, Just Like the Nikon D3 was and both still are. This new one is simply Not. I want a still camera, Not a Video camera, I'll buy a video camera[ Which I have]. Don't care if you can shoot at 50,000 iso, I've never gone above 200. I really don't want More megapixels either, I want better megapixels and if they do give you More, I want better Glass to resolve them. Which is not the case now with every DSLR. Im very fortunate as I teach and every week I get to process Images from every camera out there shot in controlled situations. The original 5D was spectacular, especially with Leica glass. The Mk2 was amazing and still is. The D2x and D3 were also spectacular all being equal...Like Talent.. The only Camera I would get today if I needed something else that was small with amazing Quality and resolution is the new Fuji X1 pro. I tested it and was blown away. You can keep your bells and whistles and stuff you'll never use in the real world unless your a specialist in sports or wildlife all I need is superior Glass,One page of menus,A choice of 3/4 lenses and around 16 "GOOD" MP's. Then I'll upgrade. Sounds Like back to leica??? LOL
Optics are King Guys,Bodies will come and go, The guys who make these things completely understand the reason Most think a newer camera will somehow make you see better and shoot better. It will Not. And anyone thats been at this a long will agree. But most of us are full Manual folks anyway. Your mileage may vary, I've already plopped down a fortune on every new uber camera. No More.
-
Today, the only thing which can get me going is first class optics, now that is what I think Canon should have done, instead of this toy they should have launched a few new L-optics.
best.
They are launching a few soon. In fact I thought they might be announced at the same time, but I guess they didn't want to steal any thunder from the big Mk3 announcement.
-
How good is the timelapse function in the D800? I don't mind having to use an intervalometer but it would be nice for the times when I have forgotten to put it in my camera bag.
One of the big advantages of the Canon is that the way the remote trigger is implemented is that you can do bulb ramping for time-lapse when you have long transitions from day to night.
On the 5D II half the time I'm actually using the intervalometer in a way where I'm just using the camera in continuous shooting mode with long exposures. For example in this clip: Tokyo in Timelapse ([url]http://vimeo.com/37790190[/url]) only about 2 scenes are actually using a timer setting on the intervalometer, the rest are exposures of 0.5-1.5 seconds shot continuously. If you don't actually have something to do bulb ramping, manually adjusting exposure times is much easier if you're using an external intervalometer rather than the built-in one.
In practice, even if an intervalometer is built in, I'd probably still use a remote trigger most of the time. The real issue with the D800s for timelapse though is just the file size. You don't need that much extra resolution, but it is nice to be able to get the benefit of shooting in RAW, particularly for adjusting white-balance in changing light conditions - without any sRAW setting, its just a massive amount of data to handle without any benefit.
Great timelapse! Were you using an Omnitracker on the bridge sequence?
-
Right now for me the D800E with a 14-24 is looking really good against this Mark III. I shoot quit a bit of real estate, architecture and studio and I'd love that resolution. We'll see when the comparisons come out.
-
For those who shoot video the D800 is still way behind in quality, do some research on vertical and horizontal sampling for video on the D800. I am sticking with my 5D Mark II but if I shot a lot more photos for $$ I would upgrade in a second. Happy to see better image quality anytime as that is what matters in then end. Who cares about more pixels!
-
Is it truth that full frame optics is much cheaper for Canon than for Nikon?
-
Is it truth that full frame optics is much cheaper for Canon than for Nikon?
I believe they "were", the new 24 70 is a lot more expensive.. but beside that I guess much cheaper..
-
I saw this on another forum (for filmmakers) and had to post it here. :o
http://fstoppers.com/omg-nikon-uses-5d2-phantom-hd-footage-to-promote-d800 (http://fstoppers.com/omg-nikon-uses-5d2-phantom-hd-footage-to-promote-d800)
-
I saw this on another forum (for filmmakers) and had to post it here. :o
[url]http://fstoppers.com/omg-nikon-uses-5d2-phantom-hd-footage-to-promote-d800[/url] ([url]http://fstoppers.com/omg-nikon-uses-5d2-phantom-hd-footage-to-promote-d800[/url])
Wow that's incredible. So their people basically just stole a bunch of clips from the net to put together their promo material. Surely someone must have recognised that they of all people should be respecting copyright of filmmakers?
-
Great timelapse! Were you using an Omnitracker on the bridge sequence?
Thanks! The bridge sequence (at. 0.28) is a sequence of full resolution raw images with a digital zoom applied in post processing. One of the challenges of doing these while traveling is that I'm not carrying heavy gear, so I need to find ways of adding motion while still just using the camera and tripod.
-
I saw this on another forum (for filmmakers) and had to post it here. :o
[url]http://fstoppers.com/omg-nikon-uses-5d2-phantom-hd-footage-to-promote-d800[/url] ([url]http://fstoppers.com/omg-nikon-uses-5d2-phantom-hd-footage-to-promote-d800[/url])
Wow that's incredible. So their people basically just stole a bunch of clips from the net to put together their promo material. Surely someone must have recognised that they of all people should be respecting copyright of filmmakers?
umm... oops
-
If I didn't buy a 5D2 last summer this alone "This correction is based on Canon-created lens profiles, up to 29 of which can be downloaded and saved onto the camera. These profiles allow correction not only of lateral CA but also of the harder-to-fix axial CA" would almost make it worth the upgrade. I only use a couple of fast primes and CA is killing me, especially when I have to remove 3 differently coloured aberrations from the high contrast edges
you might be better off investing in better glass (better lenses) than a new camera body. Good glass can do wonders in eliminating CA.
-
I've been telling myself for the past 2 years that I'd hold off buying a MkII and wait for the MkIII - in the meantime buy lenses and lights if the itch to spend money on gear needs scratching.
Now the MkIII is out, am wondering if it's worth the upgrade - maybe keep the MkI and keep going with lens and light improvements?
haha.. me too! I think I'll give it a few months at least - the price is just a bit too much if you ask me. The one intriguing thing for me is the low light high ISO. I think I"ll rent one after they become available to see if it is something I can or can't live without for $3,500.
-
Great timelapse! Were you using an Omnitracker on the bridge sequence?
Thanks! The bridge sequence (at. 0.28) is a sequence of full resolution raw images with a digital zoom applied in post processing. One of the challenges of doing these while traveling is that I'm not carrying heavy gear, so I need to find ways of adding motion while still just using the camera and tripod.
Great timelapse. I especially liked the "light tunnel" effect at the beginning. Thanks for posting that.
-
If I didn't buy a 5D2 last summer this alone "This correction is based on Canon-created lens profiles, up to 29 of which can be downloaded and saved onto the camera. These profiles allow correction not only of lateral CA but also of the harder-to-fix axial CA" would almost make it worth the upgrade. I only use a couple of fast primes and CA is killing me, especially when I have to remove 3 differently coloured aberrations from the high contrast edges
you might be better off investing in better glass (better lenses) than a new camera body. Good glass can do wonders in eliminating CA.
AFAIK every fast prime has a lot or even more CA...(I'm talking f1.8 or faster).
-
I just tested the Nikon D800 and D800E (so slightly off topic), excellent resolution, I'm impressed so far. Tomorrow I'll play with the 5D3 and see how it goes. Anyway, the Canon is horribly expensive here.
To continue off topic, I tested the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG EX on 5D2, trying to steer clear (again) of the Canon 85mm f/1.2L. Maybe that copy of sigma was faulty, I don't know - thing is, I never saw that much lateral CA and bokeh fringing in one package. The face of a person a bit backlit in the showroom had green CA on the left side of the head, magenta on the right and yellow on the top, it was hilarious! ;D
-
Just stay away from Sigma, they can be optically good, even excellent, but I've had focusing problems with most of them (I had 4 and tested another 10 or so, all different models, not just different copies). I currently own only 50 1.4 and after it messed up virtually most of my last shoot I decided to get rid of it and never buy another again. The problem was that if the focus misses, it doesn't hunt and it also misses just enough to not spot it during the shoot and that the photos are usable if you downsize them down to 6 mpix at best (from 21). I never had such issues with original lenses it either locks focus properly or hunts (in low light). They rarely miss. I'm going for the optically worse option now, Canon 50 1.4, at least its focusing is reliable. AF motor and build quality is not on par either, but what good do they do if they deliver (and you never know when it will happen, that's what's the worst about it) OFF shots. When it comes to CA, I just now it'll give me a headache every time I'll post process photos unless there are no contrasty areas in the shots.
-
Sigma is well known for bad quality control at least regarding their focusing problems. I also have a 50mm f/1.4 and luckily, it's excellent. Truth be told, some Sigma dude calibrated it in the lab for me. There is no need for microadjustments now, it's on zero. It's bokeh is second only to 50mm f/1.2L Canon.
-
I did send it back for a FW upgrade, it misfocused past 1,5 or 2m. When I bought 5D2, i had to microadjust it, while it was set to zero before that, coupled with 1Ds3. I was looking at the misfocused shots and most were taken from just a small step longer distance, 0,5m max. It could be that the problem I had before the upgrade is reoccurring, but I'm so fed up with this constant hassle that I won't bother anymore. It was decent for a while for me to. You just never know with Sigma, unless you're very lucky.
-
If you're that fed up with your Sigma, would you consider selling? If so, what would you want for it?
-
I've been telling myself for the past 2 years that I'd hold off buying a MkII and wait for the MkIII - in the meantime buy lenses and lights if the itch to spend money on gear needs scratching.
Now the MkIII is out, am wondering if it's worth the upgrade - maybe keep the MkI and keep going with lens and light improvements?
haha.. me too! I think I'll give it a few months at least - the price is just a bit too much if you ask me. The one intriguing thing for me is the low light high ISO. I think I"ll rent one after they become available to see if it is something I can or can't live without for $3,500.
Great idea please keep me updated :D
-
the MKIII in my living area is now really 1100,- Euro more expensive than what I had paid for my MKII and I had one of the first shipped in my place. The recent pricing policy of Canon is really questionable though I have ordered the G1X I really think this one is overpriced too let alone the new lenses like 24mm, 24mm-70mm etc.
That a company is a market leader for a long time is obviously neither good for their pricing nor their products, that the Powershot-series with the G1X has now become the most innovative product of the current Canon product-line speaks for itself. (parallels with istock seems obvious to me ;D). Pride will have a fall! Hopefully sooner than later!
-
Does Mk III have the same batteries as Mk II ?
I have twp Mk II bodies in my bag (the other one is a backup). If I buy a Mk III, I will have one Mk II as a backup. But I would not like to start charging and carrying around two types of batteries...
-
They could be, although when it comes to high end models with higher capacity batteries, they did change the batteries, they now have smaller capacities due to new regulations (in Japan). That was the case with D4.
-
Does Mk III have the same batteries as Mk II ?
I have twp Mk II bodies in my bag (the other one is a backup). If I buy a Mk III, I will have one Mk II as a backup. But I would not like to start charging and carrying around two types of batteries...
Yep, they both use the LP-E6 battery (http://www.togtech.com/canon-5d-mark-iii/). They may have upgraded the quality of the battery, but the physical size and set up of the battery are the same.
-
Fast lenses always cause CA, fringing, etc. I have a Nikkor, noct, 50mil, 1.2, beautyful lens but with CA, as does my Canon, 14 L.mil,2.8. pretty full of it. With so many aspherical elemnents, its weir really.
-
Does Mk III have the same batteries as Mk II ?
I have twp Mk II bodies in my bag (the other one is a backup). If I buy a Mk III, I will have one Mk II as a backup. But I would not like to start charging and carrying around two types of batteries...
Yep, they both use the LP-E6 battery ([url]http://www.togtech.com/canon-5d-mark-iii/[/url]). They may have upgraded the quality of the battery, but the physical size and set up of the battery are the same.
Different battery grip though, which is a shame, guess it brings them a few more dollars in.
-
Does Mk III have the same batteries as Mk II ?
I have twp Mk II bodies in my bag (the other one is a backup). If I buy a Mk III, I will have one Mk II as a backup. But I would not like to start charging and carrying around two types of batteries...
Yep, they both use the LP-E6 battery ([url]http://www.togtech.com/canon-5d-mark-iii/[/url]). They may have upgraded the quality of the battery, but the physical size and set up of the battery are the same.
Thanks... that's nice.
-
They have preorders at one store in Australia for the Mk3 in Australia at $AUD4199 , the Mk2 is $AUD2399. That's a significant difference.
What did the 5dMKII list for orginally in USD ?
-
They have preorders at one store in Australia for the Mk3 in Australia at $AUD4199 , the Mk2 is $AUD2399. That's a significant difference.
What did the 5dMKII list for orginally in USD ?
So basically about $900 more than the price in the US. Same as everything else in Australia - you have to pay significantly more.
-
They have preorders at one store in Australia for the Mk3 in Australia at $AUD4199 , the Mk2 is $AUD2399. That's a significant difference.
What did the 5dMKII list for orginally in USD ?
So basically about $900 more than the price in the US. Same as everything else in Australia - you have to pay significantly more.
Come to Croatia to see how prices can be high for professional equipment... Smaller market greater prices...
Once one american contributor told me that probably 100$ mean a lot for us...
I had to put "grocery prices" in one post to proof him that 100$ in USA worth much more than in this part of Europe....
-
They have preorders at one store in Australia for the Mk3 in Australia at $AUD4199 , the Mk2 is $AUD2399. That's a significant difference.
What did the 5dMKII list for orginally in USD ?
So basically about $900 more than the price in the US. Same as everything else in Australia - you have to pay significantly more.
And the retailers wonder why more and more people are buying online.
The price difference is almost an airfare to Hawaii
-
They have preorders at one store in Australia for the Mk3 in Australia at $AUD4199 , the Mk2 is $AUD2399. That's a significant difference.
What did the 5dMKII list for orginally in USD ?
So basically about $900 more than the price in the US. Same as everything else in Australia - you have to pay significantly more.
And the retailers wonder why more and more people are buying online.
The price difference is almost an airfare to Hawaii
Unfortunately the GST limit for shipping camera gear is A$1000 otherwise you end up having to mess around with customs duty and pay that, but for anything below that ordering online does the trick.
The big retail duopoly is trying to bring down the GST limit to stop people importing their own products and push up prices even further. Sorry for going off topic, but I'm reminded every time about the reason why prices in Australia are so high:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1et_HBmLYw[/youtube]
-
^^^ Ouch! That's a pretty serious retail duopoly you have in Australia. Thought it was bad enough in the UK where Tesco controls 8% of all consumer spending.
Surely though, in the greater scheme of things, imported goods must have got much cheaper as the AUD has strengthened against the USD over the last couple of years? I know that doesn't help if your earnings are in USD but most Australians should have benefited.
-
Once one american contributor told me that probably 100$ mean a lot for us...
I had to put "grocery prices" in one post to proof him that 100$ in USA worth much more than in this part of Europe....
typical yanks.
and they can't even spot Croatia on a map.
-
typical yanks.
and they can't even spot Croatia on a map.
And you find that surprising? Out of the 7,000,000,000+ people on this planet, how many of them do you think can?
More surprising is how many of them can't spot USA on a map. ;D
-
Come to Croatia to see how prices can be high for professional equipment... Smaller market greater prices...
Once one american contributor told me that probably 100$ mean a lot for us...
I had to put "grocery prices" in one post to proof him that 100$ in USA worth much more than in this part of Europe....
I hear that a lot too.
I made some maths, if I want to but a top camera with two good lenses, it's worth travelling to NYC to buy at B&H and then return home. Much cheaper than buying the same equipment here - plus I can enjoy NYC even if just one day.
Moreover, Rio is one of the most expensive cities in the world.
-
typical yanks.
and they can't even spot Croatia on a map.
And you find that surprising? Out of the 7,000,000,000+ people on this planet, how many of them do you think can?
More surprising is how many of them can't spot USA on a map. ;D
hahaha they will tell you they need google maps ... how could they live without google maps or wikipedia ... ?
-
They have preorders at one store in Australia for the Mk3 in Australia at $AUD4199 , the Mk2 is $AUD2399. That's a significant difference.
What did the 5dMKII list for orginally in USD ?
Down to $3999AUD at the store in question.