5D replacement!!??

[fatrat]

Have Canon announced when they will have a 5D replacement?
As much as I like canon I cant imagine myself buying a 5D over a D300.

[The_Camera_Poser]

I'd buy a 5D over a D300 now......

[Jim G]

No, they haven't announced that. They won't until it's released, either. :p Check the Rumours section of the forum? :p

[fatrat]

Ok Cool.
I would rather get a 40D over a 5D, more versitle and latest 14bit chip set.
But If they had a 5D with the latest chip set and specsand speed of a D300. Wow

[xchupacabrax]

Same here.

I'd buy a 5D over a D300 now......

[Jim G]

Ok Cool.
I would rather get a 40D over a 5D, more versitle and latest 14bit chip set.
But If they had a 5D with the latest chip set and specsand speed of a D300. Wow

Sure, that'd be nice.. maybe this year sometime :p

[xchupacabrax]

Unless you shoot sports trust me, 5d all the way!

Ok Cool.
I would rather get a 40D over a 5D, more versitle and latest 14bit chip set.
But If they had a 5D with the latest chip set and specsand speed of a D300. Wow

[mzivtins]

Unless you shoot sports trust me, 5d all the way!
QFT

FF is the winner, the D300 is the best crop camera on the market now, but then the price is £400 more than the 40d! and you dont really get much more! 7 frames a second... the 1d mkIII beats that at 9-10 i think from memory???

i bought the 5 just over a month ago, i had a 350d before then, i tried the 40d and the d80 and d200... the 40d was winning big style... but they had a 5d in the counter... i tried that with the 24-105mm and well the view-finder and then the true wide angle meant it was what I needed/wanted. so the tech didnt really matter, the 40d has the digicIII where as the 5d had the digicII

So really a 5d update would be nice, maybe canon are scared to update the 5d? imagine the 5d with burst speeds better than the d300 and at FF?? with a new DIGICIII 14bit? man i'm drooling!

Bassically i dont think it really needs an update urgently as the FF market isnt as cut-throat and aps-c cams like the 40d and d300 and this is where cannon's public market is i think.

[xchupacabrax]

QFT

FF is the winner, the D300 is the best crop camera on the market now, but then the price is £400 more than the 40d! and you dont really get much more! 7 frames a second... the 1d mkIII beats that at 9-10 i think from memory???

i bought the 5 just over a month ago, i had a 350d before then, i tried the 40d and the d80 and d200... the 40d was winning big style... but they had a 5d in the counter... i tried that with the 24-105mm and well the view-finder and then the true wide angle meant it was what I needed/wanted. so the tech didnt really matter, the 40d has the digicIII where as the 5d had the digicII

So really a 5d update would be nice, maybe canon are scared to update the 5d? imagine the 5d with burst speeds better than the d300 and at FF?? with a new DIGICIII 14bit? man i'm drooling!

Bassically i dont think it really needs an update urgently as the FF market isnt as cut-throat and aps-c cams like the 40d and d300 and this is where cannon's public market is i think.

Amen, I waited a year to buy a 5d, the funny thing that sold me is that the camera is over 2 years old and I can't even find a complaint about the image quality, yet I've seen many post about people complaining about the D300 because of soft images and the fact that the D300 was just released. D300 shouldn't be compared to 5d but the 40d, the fact that the 5d held up pretty close vs the Nikon D3 in high ISO. Enough said!

[mzivtins]

I just got back from latvia... i will post a pic up in here shot at iso 3200... the thing has the same noise levels as a 350d a iso 400, it is stupid how good the FF CMOS is, my girlfriend could not believe it! it had less noise then her LCA running ISO 400! although i am buying an EOS 3 for her (she thinks its for me haha)

Nikons feel infinished to me, and the lenses always look kinda cheap which is a chame because nikkor do some fantastic lenses! kinda like the leader in macro from what i have read (sharpness tests)

[RYC]

I purchased both the d300 w/18-200mmVR and 5D/24-105 kit at the same time a month ago. Before I committed myself to an older Canon camera, I had to see for myself what the hype was about with the D300. The two kits were comparably priced. In its favor, the Nikon had better AWB indoors, higher frame rate, and better construction. In the end, it came down to image quality. True, I had to use custom white balance with the 5d indoors, but once everything was properly set up, I was blown away by the image quality. I also tried the Nikon on some low light landscape photos. It handled colors extremely well, but I was disappointed by the resolution (maybe noise reduction kicking in). I was actually relieved by the results because I was not looking forward to switching and spending all that extra money to replace the great Canon lenses I already own. I returned the Nikon kit. I'm glad I tested the Nikon gear though. Now I don't feel insecure when people are raving about how great the new Nikons are.

[Nice Glass]

Ok Cool.
I would rather get a 40D over a 5D, more versitle and latest 14bit chip set.

Is there some gallery of pictures comparing the newer 14bit chip set? I haven't seen pictures taken with a 40D that look any better than a 5D.

[DVS_WiNdz]

Should be announced later in the year.

[The_Camera_Poser]

With all the problems Canon is having with it's new models, and considering that the 5D still has outstanding IQ, low noise performance, etc, I don't think I'll buy a new 5D for atleast a year it's production starts, and then it'd have to look a lot more like a 1Ds MkII to get me to buy it over a used 5D. I love the 5D IQ, but really dislike the gamble involved in buying the latest round of Canon top-end cameras.

[Paul J McCain]

I don't know, the 5D is a nice little machine. Unless you're really doing sports or something, there's not many advantages on the D300.

[scomeau1]

The 5D is a great camara - But the price and the age of the 5D holds back me from getting one.

Waiting for the replacment to come out my self.

Scott

[mzivtins]

The 5D is a great camara - But the price and the age of the 5D holds back me from getting one.

Waiting for the replacment to come out my self.

Scott


age wise it looks the same as the latest 40d's etc or do you mean tech? because remember the IQ, and isnt that really all that matters?

and the price??? you must be looking at ripp-off sites... here in the UK you can pick up a new 5d and an L for £1800 in a high-street shop!!!! thats a FF camera for less than £1800! the ISO performance at 800,1000,1600,and 3200 is astonashing. are you sure you dont think thats a good deal?

mine is only 1-2 months old... i baught it over everything else (other than the 1d as my cash limit didnt stretch that far) i tried the d200, 40d etc etc but this won, for me it was the camera that put a big grin on my face when i say a true wide angle and the beauty that is the view finder and the low levels of noise.

They tried to sell me the 40d at first using live view...thats one thing i hope they leave out of the new 5d, silly silly thing IMO...

[wernersl]

for those who are holding out on the 5D because it doesnt use the 14bit digicIII...why? what do you expect it to do for you? i challenge you to provide me visible evidence as to why this feature is of utmost importance. i understand color and digital logic so spare me the tech talk. show me side by side differences that can be seen at other than 100% views! even then...i dont know that my monitor (or most printers) could exploit that advantage. anyway...prove to me that i am being ridiculous, because i dont see that feature as being a show-stopper. thanks all.

[wernersl]

I'd buy a 5D over a D300 now......
+1 (oh wait...already got one!)

[daveshel]

for those who are holding out on the 5D because it doesnt use the 14bit digicIII...why? what do you expect it to do for you? i challenge you to provide me visible evidence as to why this feature is of utmost importance. i understand color and digital logic so spare me the tech talk. show me side by side differences that can be seen at other than 100% views! even then...i dont know that my monitor (or most printers) could exploit that advantage. anyway...prove to me that i am being ridiculous, because i dont see that feature as being a show-stopper. thanks all.

But the Digic III along with the dust cleaning system and the larger LCD...

[wernersl]

yeah we all know how useful that other crap is

[dbyrd]

for those who are holding out on the 5D because it doesnt use the 14bit digicIII...why? what do you expect it to do for you? i challenge you to provide me visible evidence as to why this feature is of utmost importance. i understand color and digital logic so spare me the tech talk. show me side by side differences that can be seen at other than 100% views! even then...i dont know that my monitor (or most printers) could exploit that advantage. anyway...prove to me that i am being ridiculous, because i dont see that feature as being a show-stopper. thanks all.

Well, all of the better SLRs are certainly at a level where you are not going to find much difference on most monitors.

People love hardware, especially the people who hang on these kinds of forums, much more than they do photographs.

I want a camera that I can get sharp, noiseless 40 x60 prints (and considerably smaller). On that scale all of the difference show up.

db

[mzivtins]

Well, all of the better SLRs are certainly at a level where you are not going to find much difference on most monitors.

People love hardware, especially the people who hang on these kinds of forums, much more than they do photographs.

I want a camera that I can get sharp, noiseless 40 x60 prints (and considerably smaller). On that scale all of the difference show up.

db

hahahaha yeah... right hahahaha!

all those poor pros, with their non-digicIII 1D mkII's, god knows how they live with themselves. all those prints in magazines with cameras that dont have the digic III, damn the D3, 5d, 1d, 1d mkII... ouch they are all terrible.

please specify the differences that show up. having a 14bit dgic III is just the process, it doesnt actually give you any more data per picture or anymore pixels, so what you said is something that is very hard to believe! myabe i am wrong, maybe the digic III allows for 200mb RAW pictures straight out of the camera?

[mzivtins]

i LOL at the LCD point, you really think a full size raw is viewable on a 3" LCD? hahaha these cameras lcs screen should only be used for setting setup, if the LCD is important, by a point and shoot.

[wernersl]

Well, all of the better SLRs are certainly at a level where you are not going to find much difference on most monitors.

People love hardware, especially the people who hang on these kinds of forums, much more than they do photographs.

I want a camera that I can get sharp, noiseless 40 x60 prints (and considerably smaller). On that scale all of the difference show up.

db
so youre telling me that when youre travelling at 65 miles per hour on the freeway and pass that coors light billboard with photos of beautiful half naked women on it youre going to see the difference? oh...maybe you are talking about the large photos you see in the store-fronts at the mall. hmmm...dont think you will see it there either. i will say that if you were to shoot a photo like that with the current 5D (and you knew what the hell you were doing) it would be stunning. i like new toys as much as the next clown, but lets get real. maybe the new 5D will ship with a prepackaged photog so you dont even have to worry about shooting the scene! quite honestly...that is the next step. hardware improvements are great...but some folks on here are a little TOO nit-picky. i can see the rumor boards now.

my 5dmkII sucks. its...black..with an lcd that is hard to see during a nuclear blast. unacceptable canon. or maybe...i took a 6 hour exposure of my lens cap and found a warm pixel! what do i do????

seriously...the day the 40d was even anounced you had people pissing and moaning and speculating on the 50d. when will it end? technology will continue to evolve, but with the leaps and bounds that have been made over the last few years i fear that many people have un-real expectations as to where its headed. you want to impress me with new hardware? lets change the 35mm format! i ran across this yesterday. now theres an idea!

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=4950818&postcount=20

anyway...i will continue to be happy with my 5d and ancient 1d, and continue to explore and learn photographic technique. if my budget expands maybe the 1d will get an update for me, but until then i think i have the tools i need to accomplish what i want to accomplish...that is...making better photographs every day.

my $.03

[mzivtins]

my 5dmkII sucks. its...black..with an lcd that is hard to see during a nuclear blast. unacceptable canon. or maybe...i took a 6 hour exposure of my lens cap and found a warm pixel! what do i do????


hahahaha that was pure awesomeness!

I love the 14bit arguement tho... dam... you know if people are going to argue for 14bit and 12bit processing then they need to be careful, as analougue is ALWAYS better.

what benafits does the 14bit give? i mean you cant get rid of noise that is made from the sensor signal? and like the 1d, i prefer the camera to at very little noise redustion and leave my picture the heck alone... the 5d uses a bit more, but i hope in the update the dont at some stupid noise reduction 14bit bullsh1t, and leave the camera trully RAW baby yeah!

[wernersl]

ok...found something. read this complete article. again...i understand a/d converters but wanted to see side by side comparisons. there is a slight advantage for the 14 bit engine, which i expected, but i dont think it is quite enough to sit and wait for a camera because of it.

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/14-bit-raw-12-bit-part-two.html

now bear in mind and take it with a grain of salt. the comparison was done with a :o Noink :o. anyway...take from it what you will. i will continue to shoot with my :rolleyes: outdated :rolleyes: 5D.

[mzivtins]

ok...found something. read this complete article. again...i understand a/d converters but wanted to see side by side comparisons. there is a slight advantage for the 14 bit engine, which i expected, but i dont think it is quite enough to sit and wait for a camera because of it.

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/14-bit-raw-12-bit-part-two.html

now bear in mind and take it with a grain of salt. the comparison was done with a :o Noink :o. anyway...take from it what you will. i will continue to shoot with my :rolleyes: outdated :rolleyes: 5D.

haha, that test is false by process anyways, the only way to get a true test is for the camera to have two image processors, on 12bit and the other 14bit.

bassically its signal noise ratio... everyone knows SNR

your using 14bit architecture for a 12bit output. surely by calculation that would give you a 16% drop in SNR. just think its silly to compare 12bit shots taken with a processor that is 14 bit haha, the sensor is clearly designed with the sensor in mind. and teh 12-14bit switch is a MASSIVE gimmick that nikon use to trick people of their FPS speeds!! they measure them at 12bit and then compare then to canons, which no-holds-barred is 14bit all the way... the real test would be a 5d against a ff 14bit. maybe to 1d mkIII?

[mzivtins]

The 5D is a great camara - But the price and the age of the 5D holds back me from getting one.

Waiting for the replacment to come out my self.

Scott

just to re-touch this... go find a FF digital camera in the world that would be cheaper than the 5d? you forget that the 5d is FF and is the little brother to the 1d series, and the ###d's and ##d's are a different family really.

[wernersl]

i guess a close comparison of 12 vs 14 bit would be a 40D vs XTi. same rez and similar feature set and (correct me if im wrong) same sensor. anyway...i think i've beat this topic to death now, but still interested in a comparison. would do it myself but dont have the cameras to do it. and i wouldnt put my 5 against anything because it would just make the competitor look bad. :)

[mzivtins]

i guess a close comparison of 12 vs 14 bit would be a 40D vs XTi. same rez and similar feature set and (correct me if im wrong) same sensor. anyway...i think beat this topic to death now.

noooo lets continue! we are winning the fight seeing as the competition has lost interest :lol::lol::lol:

[wernersl]

yeah i see that.

[Nukey]

The 5D is a great camara - But the price and the age of the 5D holds back me from getting one.

Waiting for the replacment to come out my self.

Scott

Just so you know, if a replacement for the canon 5D comes out it's going to be waayyyy more expensive than the current price of the 5D. I assume it will be similar to what the 5D was when it came out? If you think it's a lot now, then I would suggest getting a 40D or similar.

[wernersl]

yeah...if price is holding you back maybe have a look at a used 20 or 30. i say that because a used 5 can be had for peanuts now (relatively speaking). hell you can get a complete rig for around 1500 bucks or so. that seems to be what the ebay 5d's have been selling for.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-5D-EOS-5D-Package_W0QQitemZ200202869545QQihZ010QQcategoryZ43 454QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Blue S2]

14 bit should have better gradation in tone...look at the medium format digitals...they are similar to the 5D...but slightly bigger pixels and 16bit.

And for the 40x60 inch print...a 5D gets pretty darn close.

A 5D RAW file prints natively at 16x24 @ 150dpi. 300 dpi is not necessary at that size on paper. Now with a GOOD program and correct processing/sharpening...like PhotoKit Sharpener or something...you should be able to do a 2x resize without visible degradation. So that gets you to 32x48. Thats a large image. Especially once you have matted and framed it. A 1DsmkIII and digital MF backs can output that size with out problem I figure. I bet a 5D could do it as well as long as no one is taking a loupe to the print.

Thats pretty big regardless for a 35mm image capture. Traditionally I consider medium format, and preferably large format systems more commonly making the super huge prints. 35mm to 60" is a HUGE difference. 8x10" to a 60" is barely a jump.

[wernersl]

well...true 16 bit is a far cry from either 12 or 14 bit my friend. 16 bit native output would really be a selling point over 12...14 over 12, not so much. anyway. enjoy your current 5d everyone. still the best looking image out there imho.

[CousinMadness]

well...true 16 bit is a far cry from either 12 or 14 bit my friend. 16 bit native output would really be a selling point over 12...14 over 12, not so much. anyway. enjoy your current 5d everyone. still the best looking image out there imho.

I stumbled across this thread Shawn, and found myself reading through every posting and reply. You forge a good argument for and against the 14 bit processing.

However... my reasons for finding this thread were to ascertain more real life rhetoric as to the little beasts capabilities. I am on my second Canon body in as many years. The 300D in 2005 and XTi last year. My interests in the 5D are simple, it's full frame. The amount of photo sensors that are being crammed onto that little sensor these days is becoming ridiculous. The 5D's separation most definitely quenches the refractory abberations from other sensors in close proximity. At 12 megapixels, this is a mere 20% more than the XTi. That alone would not generate enough hysteria for me to run out and empty my wallet for a 5D.

The concept of the 5D is what excites me. In less than 3 years since the World woke up one morning to a sub $1000 DSLR, a full frame was on the Streets. My inherent interest is not the recent brand of dangling carrot (14 bit), but the availability of a higher pixel count on this much larger sensor.

The new Mk 111 technology has procured 21.1 megapixels. I believe there is a sweet spot in and around the 15 to 16 meg range for the more economical 5D. What, if ever, this beast would be called (6D or 5Dmk11), I believe this is where it will make it's next mark. Not the processing, but resolving power on what is at the moment, an under-used piece of 36x24mm silicate.

I have enjoyed the thread. Very interesting reading.


Cousin. ;)

[Sfordphoto]

really want to see this fabled mk II 5d.
might want to get a used 5d...but then I would want a 24-70 to go with it :D
I think in a few years time, the price on 5d sucessors will drop to at most $1000.
After all the 3 megapixel EOS D30 cropper was introduced at $3000 in 2000 :)

[wernersl]

really want to see this fabled mk II 5d.
might want to get a used 5d...but then I would want a 24-70 to go with it :D
I think in a few years time, the price on 5d sucessors will drop to at most $1000.
After all the 3 megapixel EOS D30 cropper was introduced at $3000 in 2000 :)
if i am reading your post correctly you are saying the 5dII will drop to 1000 in just a few years? i doubt it. i doubt the 5d will drop much below 1000. 5-6 years from now, sure. the d30 was ground breaking technology at the time. that came at a steep price. as time went on technology rapidly evolved, hence 40d for 1200 bucks new. will technology make a similar rapid jump over the 5d? i doubt it. not until the format changes all together. sure new features will be available and resolution will, no doubt, increase, but not to earth shattering levels that will leave the 5d worthless. look at the first digital back from kodak. it was piggy backed onto a nikon f3 (i think) around 1991. this was unheard of at the time. 1.3 MP sensor on an slr? price? around 30k! it is essensially worthless now because of the availability of technology. i think we will see a change of format before we see too many more MAJOR technological advances in current dslr's. i think i am having a hard time explaining my point, but dont expect to pay under 1000 for a 5d or 5dmarkwhatever anytime soon!

maybe someone can make sense of what i am trying to say and explain it in simple caveman terms?

anyway...i would like to see an update as much as the next guy but you wont see my 5d go on the auction block anytime soon.

[Blue S2]

The 5D is still a professionally useable tool that will continue to do what it needs. Technology won't outdate the fact that it is effective. It can natively print a 16x24 file cleanly. It has fantastic noise in print, its full frame and will continue working with any EOS lens released, and its a solid build. I, as others, do professional work with this camera every day. Nothing will change that fact now or in 5 years. I will still be able to provide professional work with it. Just as the Leica's have not dropped. A Leica M3 is STILL over $1000!!!! Why? Well...still gets the job done. All the medium format stuff. Still expensive. Why... still gets the job done. Metering might be better...but output? Same. Fancy custom functions...nice...but same results in the long run. (with exceptions of course)

Early digitals were not better than film. They were new tech... but not at the point where it was providing the results needed. Now digitals do provide the quality level needed. New technology might make things even better, but it won't discredit functionality. I also don't see such cameras falling below the half way mark by too much. The 5D MIGHT drop below 800...but it sure won't be anytime soon. I think it will level off between 1200 and 1600 for the longer run.

[wernersl]

and fwiw...do a search on ebay for used 1v film cameras (1vhs with the power booster). those are still selling for more than the original 1D!!! average price for the 1vhs is around 900 bucks used. food for thought.

[Blue S2]

How many years has the 1v been out?

[wernersl]

march 2000...almost exactly 8 years ago.

[Blue S2]

You can buy a new 1v for roughly 1600 now. Seeing it sell for 900 used sounds basically where it should be. Just about the half way mark.

[wernersl]

funny thing is 1600 was the list price at introduction.

[coolshot]

i want a FF body with 40d features. I want live view, faster burst,bigger more accurate LCD, and more info in the view finder. These features don't make or break a body but they help speed things along when shooting, at least for me.

[davidwegs]

I'd buy a 5D over a D300 now......


I have both and mostly prefer the D300 I am sorry to say.

[wernersl]

I have both and mostly prefer the D300 I am sorry to say.
interesting

[TomM1]

A discussion about this, here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=27125455

[mzivtins]

A discussion about this, here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=27125455



6/3 fps continuous shooting for up to 68 frames


FINALLY!!!! the 40d owners will shut-up! :lol::lol:

man, dual digic III's? same weather sealing and build as the mkIII? man, i think this is lies... 14 bit... naaa it cant be THAT good?? can it? i cant wait :)

[wernersl]

ok...read the thread @ dpreview. sounds like another hokey pinokey line of crap like weve all heard for the last...i dont know how long. however, intrigued, i read the supposed specs from that link. here is my interpretation of the rumored 29point focus system layout. the pink squares represent the supposed 12 cross-type sensors. would be nice for something like this. too bad it will just fall to the way-side like all the other "rumors" floating around on the web. meanwhile...i will continue to enjoy my current 5d for years to come!

[andrewaaa5]

here is my interpretation of the rumored 29point focus system layout. the pink squares represent the supposed 12 cross-type sensors

Pink? erm, I think I need my monitor calibrating :(

I was waiting for the upgrade for the 5D for 10 months, and was set to buy it in May this year. Looks like I will be holding on a few more months now after this new [ faux ?? ] speculation.... :(

[krnlscott]

But why a cross type sensor on the far right and not on the far left?

[wernersl]

only because the bogus rumor stated that 12 of the sensors were cross type...and considering the center point is almost definately included that would only leave room for an odd number. this was to illustrate that this is most likely another case of incorrect information. (or its real [dont hold your breath] and they are only including a cross sensor on the right for the top point in portrait orientation which would make sense).

[wernersl]

and again...the above illustration is merely a guess based on the (mis)information of the rumor mill.