OFFICIAL: Canon 5D Mark III Announced

ching wrote in post #14006820
Positive comments are boring.
Thoughtful negative comments are informative

It gets the people going! Lol

sploo wrote in post #14005655
In the very brief preview video at http://www.dpreview.co​m …n-EOS-5D-Mark-III-preview the guy mentioned something about the Digic 5 processor filtering moire for video. So... I guess it's possible the physical AA filter is weak (for sharp stills) and they're using processing horsepower to ensure video is clean- which would be good news for us stills guys. Assuming it's true. Just wild speculation on my part of course.

I think that is exactly right. AA filter seems to be weaker. Moire in video is handled by software. It is also mentioned in this official video.

WOW ! @Shadowblade:Why are you bashing Canon 5D3 so much?
The only thing i hate about 5D3 is the price $3500, I wish it was same as D800 but thats the only thing i dislike because actual product reviews are still to come so I'm not going to bash or praise the 5D3 until then

Shadowblade wrote in post #14006794
The 5D2 was great because it had a real and major IQ benefit over its rivals, plus it was video-capable (good for some people) whereas its rival wasn't. The poor AF, poor weather sealing, etc. were all tolerable for those of us who were seeking the best IQ possible at the time. Many of us were MF film shooters, and the 5D2 finally got us to put away those bodies for good (since it outresolved most sizes of MF colour film).

The 5D3, on the other hand, seems to have nothing over its rival (at least for still photography) apart from slightly greater fps. For that reason, if you don't already have a large investment in Canon glass, there's no reason to choose the 5D3. We've seen the sample images, taken by different photographers on different websites - quite frankly, by 2012 standards, they're pathetic.

alt4852 wrote in post #14006816
explain?

The strong AA filter makes the base images soft (just look at the ISO 100 samples, which don't use much NR).

Extra noise reduction smears the pixels around and makes the images even softer.

@alt4852
Smearing an image to oblivion doesn't give you better ISO performance. It's little more than a cheap trick, often employed in crop sensored camera's...

iamdogdog wrote in post #14003458
AF sold me.
Digi5 sensor (iso-wise) = unknown
6fps = don`t care
video = don`t care
dynamic range = unknown

is it just me, I feel very excited that canon indeed listen to customer and upgrade the AF instead of bumping up the MP.

I could use a few more megapixels

nmastro wrote in post #14006840
I think that is exactly right. AA filter seems to be weaker. Moire in video is handled by software. It is also mentioned in this official video.

Look at the ISO 100 images.

They're soft.

Given that they're already shooting at baseline ISO, with good lenses, there's nothing else that could make the images soft apart from the AA filter.

Just compare them against images from the 5D2 and the Leica M9 - both have similar pixel densities, and the M9 doesn't have an AA filter. The M9 is sharpest, followed by the 5D2, with the 5D3 coming in last.

Images>>>>words.

bigcountry wrote in post #14003708
ok, so the middle four af points (in blue) will AF w 5.6 lenses:

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

it needs more double cross AF points !

here in toronto.
5d2 body only is asking for 2000 and 2800 with the kit a couple months ago.

Now the cheapest 5d2 body is 2300 even with the 5d3 coming ahead. Canon really knows how to make money because if you cannot afford 5d3 and d800, what new FF body can you get. Good for canon, bad for us.

Saxi wrote in post #14006691
I pre-ordered it. I've been waiting for a 5D for ages and didn't feel the 5D II was right for me. 2 Stops better than the 5D II w/ good AF & FPS is more than enough reason for me to jump.

at $3,400 I will hold off a little longer

watt100 wrote in post #14006852
I could use a few more megapixels

Yeah, no ideal why they put whooping 1 more MP than the 5D2...might as well leave it at 21MP
They could bump it to 24MP and make the spec looks better for the MP crowds

Shadowblade wrote in post #14006843
The strong AA filter makes the base images soft (just look at the ISO 100 samples, which don't use much NR).

Extra noise reduction smears the pixels around and makes the images even softer.

RhysPhotograph.Me wrote in post #14006844
@alt4852
Smearing an image to oblivion doesn't give you better ISO performance. It's little more than a cheap trick, often employed in crop sensored camera's...

maybe i have to go see the samples, but i figured the 5D3 would have some sort of substantive improvement over it's predecessor. if i meter properly, i can get consistently good results at ISO6400 on my 5D2's, so i'm hoping that the 5D3 can potentially do it cleaner. i guess what i'm wondering is.. is it really that bad, or are you guys exaggerating the deficiencies in a test photo or two?

With all this negativity I still hope a lot of gearheads will go for the MKIII and sell off their MKII, so I can get a good used one.
That would be fine for me.

ching wrote in post #14006820
Positive comments are boring.
Thoughtful negative comments are informative

100% agreed. And we have some people here with those types of comments, and I am glad they are in this thread. The ones with an agenda however, get on my nerves

Just a demonstration on what you get when you use in camera NR... absolute blah..

ISO6400 taken with RAW +jpg (so same exact image) with in camera NR applied to the jpg on "standard". These are 100% crops from a 7d and as about a quick and dirty comparison as you can make. A shot of my dog about 10 minutes ago