5DMIII POLL: What do you think?

dissapointed 6fps for me seems like....meh
the iso sample photos ive seen are garbage
at this point it looks like ill have to save for a 1dx

reality is people will buy this as much as we all think its a pro body. it is but at the same time it isnt I would still consider it semi pro/hobbyist camera just like the 5d2

I'll let you know when I've handled one and seen the results. Until then I'll leave the noise generation to "Those who think they know"!

tgara wrote in post #14008044
Lots of folks are looking at the sensor by itself and drawing conclusions. I think that is a mistake. One should consider the sensor in conjunction with the new Digic V processor. I bet the combo will make for some stunning images.

You mean:
I bet the combo will make for some stunning .jpeg images.

The processor allows faster fps/more advanced metering in raw and better .jpeg processing. It does not inherently improve sensor quality. I bet they have reduced the sensor read noise quite a bit though - there was a lot of room for improvement from the MkII.

My guess is 2/3 - 1 stop raw, 2 stops .jpeg.

Some people really need to see camera features from a business perspective rather than a personal one.

Why would Canon make the 5DIII almost exactly the same as the 1Dx in all but weight/size? It would completely kill the market for a professional grade camera.

The 5D was never meant as a true professional camera. More of a 'walk-about' body for people with a 1D/s or just for people who shoot landscapes and portraits who don't need spectacular AF.

2Thumbs wrote in post #14008744
Some people really need to see camera features from a business perspective rather than a personal one.

Why would Canon make the 5DIII almost exactly the same as the 1Dx in all but weight/size? It would completely kill the market for a professional grade camera.

The 5D was never meant as a true professional camera. More of a 'walk-about' body for people with a 1D/s or just for people who shoot landscapes and portraits who don't need spectacular AF.

from a business perspective ... this is a sweet camera.

the wedding/events area - sweet camera. including video.....

i will fit one in for next wedding season (2013). should be sweet.
If not this one then the 1D-X.

pretty simple.... just tools for the trade.

Razeus wrote in post #14006994
$3500 price tag is such fail.

says a Nikon user
It's not like you are going to switch to Canon all of the sudden anyway so who cares You don't see me trolling in the Nikon forums and saying bad things about the pixel dense D800

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #14009087
says a Nikon user
It's not like you are going to switch to Canon all of the sudden anyway so who cares You don't see me trolling in the Nikon forums and saying bad things about the pixel dense D800

C'mon now this comment is a bit harsh.

And let's be honest about the D800. From what we know it is a massive beast.

I think canon has address the issues but drop the ball on the price. Not because I think it's more pro, but rather, because I think this should be where the next gen should naturally be for the ame price point. For example, when a new model car comes out it has the new features that are expected improvement, bluetooth better mpg and perhaps safety advances but still falls with in a comprable range. I guess we should compare this price to the original price of 5D 2 + inflation?

Right now looking from a consumer perspective and not having handled either camera, I would opt for the Nikon. The end product demo may change that.

Hmm. The DPreview high iso/moderate light sample shots are significantly more impressive than the ones on Canon's site. The 6400-25600 look really, really impressive. Curious to get a hold of a few 'real world' low light RAW files and see what the real dynamic range gains will be...

Comparing new releases the Nikon seems to be a much better value.

It looks nice but I'm keeping my mkII for now and getting a Fuji Pro X 1 or whatever it's called.

To my mind, price is the only sticky issue with 5D3, which is otherwise an excellent successor!

I am still contemplaiting if an improved AF is worth $2K for me . 5D2 is a dang good camera on its own.

Don't get me wrong, I like all other changes too, but if they put any less of an AF improvement in it, it would be easy decision. (Or if they put an option of AF during video, at least on same level as compacts do it, could be even with limited set of lenses too).

ejenner wrote in post #14008134
You mean:
I bet the combo will make for some stunning .jpeg images.

The processor allows faster fps/more advanced metering in raw and better .jpeg processing. It does not inherently improve sensor quality. I bet they have reduced the sensor read noise quite a bit though - there was a lot of room for improvement from the MkII.

My guess is 2/3 - 1 stop raw, 2 stops .jpeg.

No, I mean both RAW and JPG. For the reasons you stated. I guess we agree on that.

It's obvious that the processor, by itself, does not improve sensor quality. Any nursery school graduate knows that. But here, the sensor is better and the processor is better. My bet is that there will be a synergistic relationship between those two components that makes both Raw and Jpg images look great.

For me, I'm gonna get one. I don't have a FF camera yet, but I've wanted one for a long time. The 5D2, while cheaper, is old, outdated technology. I want the latest/greatest, so I'm getting the 5D3.

My take:

I bought a 5D about five years ago and loved everything but the AF. The 5D2 release was a disappointment to me because, while it improved IQ and high ISO noise, it didn't address my one complaint with the 5D. So I kept the 5D and picked up a 1D3 (which later became a 1D4).

To me, the 5D3 is what I wanted from the 5D2. I think the feature set looks excellent and will be a perfect companion to the 1D4.

I admit, this camera would look a lot better at $3200, and would be a heckuva deal at $3000.

Even so....I will probably get one before the price comes down much. I fundamentally love the FF + smaller body factor as a travel camera with the 24-105L, and the old 5D high ISO limits and other lack of features sometimes crop up on me. This 5D3 just fits the bill for me.

It's funny what different folks want from bodies. Some people see a 5D2 with a good AF system and say "why would I bother?" and other people see a 5D2 with a good AF system and say "Exactly what I have been looking for over three years now."

I'm in the latter group. This camera meets my needs exactly on spec, so I suspect I'll get one before my vaction season starts this summer.

The camera looks pretty good. The high ISO samples look very good and the fact even 12800 looks quite usable, that's pretty wicked compared to where cameras were around 2006 or so. The fact we have such high usable ISOs is pretty mind boggling in general. The price will fall just like with everything else, cameras do go for less than Canon's suggested price after all.

And don't forget the price WILL come down. There are so many people willing to buy one at the high price that it is likely production will not be able to keep up for a while. It's not particularly nice of Canon, but it's fair business to raise the price 20% for a while to get what the market will bear and generate some fat profits. According to another thread, the two earlier 5ds' prices dropped substantially after 7 months or so. If you have a camera you are satisfied with, hold on til Christmas and you can probably get one for under 3K, maybe even less than that. I was initially disappointed, hoping for something really new and innovative. It's not that, but it does look to be a substantially improved camera, but nothing we who have a 5Dc or 5D2 can't wait a while for...