OFFICIAL: Canon 5D Mark III Announced

Ivann wrote in post #14007452
Are these really sooc? They look so much better than all other samples I've seen today.

Hmm.

Maybe they were able to shoot RAW and processed it like most of us would anyway. Either way, those examples looks miles better then any other I have seen. I hope that is accurate.

But I have read a few reviews that have said the details, noise, etc... are all better. So maybe we just have really bad, botched JPEG's with way too much NR and such to judge so far. Lets wait until nicer examples come flowing in before we all get all cranky at Canon.

DreDaze wrote in post #14007247
you're still on about this...i went to bed, reading your posts complaining about his comments...now i get up and it's one of the first things i read...

get over it...the guys not happy with what came out...he's allowed to say what he thinks, not everyone here are devout canon fanboys...

I am allowed to say what think as well. Most of my comments are about the camera.

if there was a way to put someone in ignore, I would have just done that and not commented about it. As it is now, if I want to read all the comments in this thread, I have to get through 30-40 from him, all telling me the same thing.

Sorry if it gets old. I will shut up about it now.

@ Invertalon
Are there any compatible raw converters yet?

RhysPhotograph.Me wrote in post #14005955
"Canon has also reduced the moire effector with complex shapes and patterns"

Pretty much confirms the stronger AA filter...

It might be in software, though. Then they can go knock themselves out with their filter.

mafoo wrote in post #14007507
I am allowed to say what think as well. Most of my comments are about the camera.

if there was a way to put someone in ignore, I would have just done that and not commented about it. As it is now, if I want to read all the comments in this thread, I have to get through 30-40 from him, all telling me the same thing.

Sorry if it gets old. I will shut up about it now.

you can put someone on ignore, just click their name and it is on the top right on their profile.

I'm confused, why would Canon release this camera when the 1DX does all this and shoots 10fps? Seems like a wasted space in the line-up?

Max Powers wrote in post #14007408
Yeah, good reply. Then again, those who do this professionally could surely go with a fully professional camera.

Currently I couldn't justify the cost of a 1-series camera with the price of a 5DII. It wouldn't really improve my photography. I don't do sports or fast moving stuff ever other than for personal purposes - some shots at an MLB game or something. I don't get paid for that.

The price point of the 5D3 is getting to the point where I would possibly start looking at a 1-series. The 1DIV + 5D2 combo would be nice I'm sure, though I really like full frame shots. The $7000ish price for the 1-series full frame is what would make me look more at the 5D3. I don't see the value (for me) in that extra $3000 (that's a couple Zeiss lenses or another body or something) for the 1-series full frame offering.

Gives me some things to think about.

mafoo wrote in post #14007507
I am allowed to say what think as well. Most of my comments are about the camera.

if there was a way to put someone in ignore, I would have just done that and not commented about it. As it is now, if I want to read all the comments in this thread, I have to get through 30-40 from him, all telling me the same thing.

Sorry if it gets old. I will shut up about it now.

click on his name...'add to ignore list'...i just made your day

Shadowblade wrote in post #14006864
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.

They are soft because they have the JPG standard NR applied, which according to Canon is +2 stops stronger than before...... oh God, I think we are not on the same page here.....

For me, it is totally justifiable. If we don't see/compare RAW, everything else is just fruitless....

Invertalon wrote in post #14007403
Now the examples were posted on DigitalRev, although a little small.

Details look amazing...

http://www.digitalrev.​com/album?id=2627543&p​hotoView=DV

12,800 looks pretty clean. 25,600 looks easily usable to me for those horribly lit church settings. A little grain never hurt anyone.

RhysPhotograph.Me wrote in post #14007123
I wonder how many times you will quote this.

it's the first time i've seen it.

it's lagging far behind smudge/smear/blur in metadata thread trending...

EveryMilesAMemory wrote in post #14007535
I'm confused, why would Canon release this camera when the 1DX does all this and shoots 10fps? Seems like a wasted space in the line-up?

1DX does 12FPS Pat!

(14FPS in Mirror Lock Up, One Shot AF and JPEG!)

Here is a good question.

Does the 5DIII have facial tracking? I know the 1D X and D800 has face and color tracking. Some people calls it gimmick, but I think would be a very nice feature to have.

I think the face exposure thing is probably more useful...

that is clean