5D MKIII being announced on the 26th?

I don't care about the bigger files or the slower response times...I'd love to have 36MP. However, the problem isn't with any of those things, it's with the IQ degradation that'd come with the cramming of pixels into the sensor. As RobDickinson said upthread, 36MP would make it about the same pixel pitch as the D7k...and while the D7K by no means has poor IQ, it does not have the same pixel-level detail/sharpness as a FF equivalent. So you'd end up having to downsize the D800's images in order to get them to the same level of pound-for-pound sharpness as the D700.

helloagain36 wrote in post #13205216
I don't think you could fit 20K 36mp files on a 1 TB drive. Still I was exaggerating obviously but you get my point.

I am aware of that...and it would be a good option if there was something in between RAW and sRAW1 which is 9.9mp...an option in the 12-18mp ballpark would be perfect...but as far as I know that doesn't exist on the 5DII...and yes I am sure that multiple file sizes will still be available on the 5DIII but I still don't see a need for 36mp other than just keeping up in the megapixel rat race. How many of us print on billboards or crop our photos down to the size of a cheez-it?

So what exactly will a 10MP RAW not allow you to do, that your acceptable minimum 12MP file will? As you said, your not printing billboards, or micro-cropping.

And as far as you seeing no-need for 36 MP files, I think you might underestimate the amount of photographers who actually embrace the higher MP count. Next time your out in a big city just take a look around at the massive amount of large-scale photo's that are used in advertising, they are everywhere. What you refer to as the MP "Rat-race" is actually Canon answering the demand for more resolution from professional photographers, maybe not you or me but there are certainly a ton of photogs out there that use them and actually need them, and like I said, for those that don't need them you can easily adjust the resolution in the menu's to suite your needs and keep your HD space from filling up

I hear people say that the higher MP is only a "Gimmick" to trick people into thinking the camera takes better photographs, and although I think that might me true with some point and shoots, not the case with $3k dollar cameras... I really don't think Canon would go through the trouble of putting more and more megapixels on high dollar professional cameras unless their was a demand for them somewhere. I even have a couple Nikon shooting buds (D700) who are wanting more MP now because they are doing alot of "Life-size" standup sports posters for customers and want the extra resolution.

If you're worried about your HD filling up, pretend you're using film and shoot fewer pictures.

rick_reno wrote in post #13205368
If you're worried about your HD filling up, pretend you're using film and shoot fewer pictures.

Yep, Just buy a couple 1GB cards and make every shot count

80 megapixel Mamiya FTW.

emsjeep wrote in post #13205384
80 megapixel Mamiya FTW.

Until Canon puts THIS in the 1DS4

10megapixel wrote in post #13205270
So what exactly will a 10MP RAW not allow you to do, that your acceptable minimum 12MP file will? As you said, your not printing billboards, or micro-cropping.

And as far as you seeing no-need for 36 MP files, I think you might underestimate the amount of photographers who actually embrace the higher MP count. Next time your out in a big city just take a look around at the massive amount of large-scale photo's that are used in advertising, they are everywhere. What you refer to as the MP "Rat-race" is actually Canon answering the demand for more resolution from professional photographers, maybe not you or me but there are certainly a ton of photogs out there that use them and actually need them, and like I said, for those that don't need them you can easily adjust the resolution in the menu's to suite your needs and keep your HD space from filling up

I hear people say that the higher MP is only a "Gimmick" to trick people into thinking the camera takes better photographs, and although I think that might me true with some point and shoots, not the case with $3k dollar cameras... I really don't think Canon would go through the trouble of putting more and more megapixels on high dollar professional cameras unless their was a demand for them somewhere. I even have a couple Nikon shooting buds (D700) who are wanting more MP now because they are doing alot of "Life-size" standup sports posters for customers and want the extra resolution.

I get what you are saying entirely...and I am not saying that a camera with those capabilities shouldn't exist at all...I just don't think it makes sense for the 5D...save it for the 1D series.

Does there not come a time when enough is enough? I mean honestly?

helloagain36 wrote in post #13204828
If the 5DIII has a 36mp sensor I will be passing on it regardless of how badass the rest of its features are.

I fill up hard drives fast enough as it is with 21mp...I don't need a camera that fills up 1TB of storage from shooting one wedding.

I'd really just love the 5Dc and the 7D to have a few glasses of wine together and make a beautiful baby.

Just shoot in DX mode with the D800 and you'll magically have a D7000.

KerriErickson wrote in post #13205495
Does there not come a time when enough is enough? I mean honestly?

Nope, the tech will continue to change and progress......was the 66Mhz Pentium processor enough? Maybe for it's time.

It's like role reversal with Canon and Nikon....
http://www.canonrumors​.com …ew-full-frame-rumors-cr1/

KerriErickson wrote in post #13205495
Does there not come a time when enough is enough? I mean honestly?

I assume your referring to megapixels,

Who's to say? I mean, enough for you may not be enough for me, and as long as we are both buying cameras from Canon they are going to try and please us both as best they can. I honestly don't get why people get so upset about extra resolution, many thought that 21 MP was too many and would interfere with 5D2's IQ, but the camera produced amazing results. Now, the if Canon puts 30+ on their next sensor you can speculate all you want, but my money is on the IQ being excellent (As always) and even better than it's predecessor.

KerriErickson wrote in post #13205495
Does there not come a time when enough is enough? I mean honestly?

When I die, enough will be enough. Until then, bring it on.

I'd say its more an emotional thing for most complainers.

...as always in photography.

Have you ever asked what a classical musician thinks about any stringed instrument like a violin. Which body would be made out of high tech polymer by only 10% of the cost compared to a hand crafted one, but 100% of the acoustic quality?

If its about technological advantage in art, of any kind, people seem to be, how do you say in America?..."whiny" (at least thats the literal translation for it in Germany)

Oh and Dude, over here We are way more uptight conservative regarding to this than you are.

How many of you really print huge posters? How many of you crop the living hell out of a picture - and how often? For my landscape pictures I carefully frame the shot and there's hardly any cropping afterwards. For my wildlife pictures I use longer lenses and yes, I crop if need be, but I certainly don't need more than what the 7D is offering. I do print my pictures at home, but frankly, the largest print is a 13x19.

I am in the camp of less megapixels but PLEASE give me better dynamic range and better AF in the next 5D. I have no use for even 25+ MPs.

Just my 2 cents

10megapixel wrote in post #13205270
So what exactly will a 10MP RAW not allow you to do, that your acceptable minimum 12MP file will? As you said, your not printing billboards, or micro-cropping.

And as far as you seeing no-need for 36 MP files, I think you might underestimate the amount of photographers who actually embrace the higher MP count. Next time your out in a big city just take a look around at the massive amount of large-scale photo's that are used in advertising, they are everywhere. What you refer to as the MP "Rat-race" is actually Canon answering the demand for more resolution from professional photographers, maybe not you or me but there are certainly a ton of photogs out there that use them and actually need them, and like I said, for those that don't need them you can easily adjust the resolution in the menu's to suite your needs and keep your HD space from filling up

I hear people say that the higher MP is only a "Gimmick" to trick people into thinking the camera takes better photographs, and although I think that might me true with some point and shoots, not the case with $3k dollar cameras... I really don't think Canon would go through the trouble of putting more and more megapixels on high dollar professional cameras unless their was a demand for them somewhere. I even have a couple Nikon shooting buds (D700) who are wanting more MP now because they are doing alot of "Life-size" standup sports posters for customers and want the extra resolution.

What you are talking about in reality is a step into medium format territory. If thats what they want to do with the top of the line cameras, That fine. I think where the problem lies is that they are building the mp counts on the sensors for video demands V/S demands of a photograoher who shoots stills. Guys like me, and lets face it, thats where most are at, dont need the huge files. If they want to build them up on the 1d series, there ya go. Step up and buy your 36mp, heck it might even be 40mps on those cameras. Maybe those cameras will be canon and nikons equilivent of medium format because with that MP count, thats where they are at.

What they are trying to do is make a camera that does it all. Didnt use to be that way. If you needed medium format, you stepped up and baught one. Im really not trying to argue. Im just suggesting that where they are going is not necessary for most photography needs. Most people DONT print poster size and billboard size prints. Thats commercial work. If you need that, buy cameras designed for that. Do they really need to go there with the professional line. Looks like thats what they intend to do.

Only way i would consider a 5D3 is if the camera synch speed will let you shoot at 1/250 or 1/320 and they put a 7D focus system in it and dual card capabilities. They are never going to go there because that would kill the 1Ds. If they make advances for videographers and up the MP count, im staying put. I just cant see what they can do w/o killing the 1Ds. Im beting it gonna be another 40D 50D situation with this update.