OFFICIAL: Canon 5D Mark III Announced

timnosenzo wrote in post #14007681
Oh, Oh, I know this one!! Because it costs half as much as the 1Dx!

Wasted space? Really?

Didn't know it was 1/2 the price. I guess it'll fill a needed slot then.

dlpasco wrote in post #14007694
I want one. My only dilemma is whether or not to jump to a Nikon. I think the focus system in the 5D3 will keep me with Canon.

The D800 is a great camera. What will keep me with Canon, is just how comfortable I am with it.

I can not think of a singel senario, where I will walk away with a collection of images from a 5D3, where if I had used a D800 instead, my images would be improved.

So why leave a system I know, a customer service department I am happy with, and take the time and energy to replace my Glass, if in the end, I really don't gain anything?

Yea, it's the 5D3 for me, provided the real reviews after launch are not disappointing. (I don't expect them to be)

I got frustrated with looking at all these soft images from the 5D3.

Why is it so hard for Canon to get images that show some usable level of sharpness that the 5D2 can show, like this:

(can't understand why getting a sharp image is easy for an amateur like me but not for highly paid Canon testers?)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

jemanner wrote in post #14007722
The 1Dx is a heck of a lot more durable camera (400K shutter versus 150K, etc), hence the premium price. Also, better weather-proofing, 12 FPS, and dual processors (I presume to accomodate the sheer volume of 12 FPS data flow) Both cameras have their place. Now if Canon would only announce a high MP version of either!

The 1Dx also has a dedicated Digic 4 just for the AF system. Something the 5D3 lacks.

wow

mafoo wrote in post #14007728
The D800 is a great camera. What will keep me with Canon, is just how comfortable I am with it.

I can not think of a singel senario, where I will walk away with a collection of images from a 5D3, where if I had used a D800 instead, my images would be improved.

So why leave a system I know, a customer service department I am happy with, and take the time and energy to replace my Glass, if in the end, I really don't gain anything?

Yea, it's the 5D3 for me, provided the real reviews after launch are not disappointing. (I don't expect them to be)

I feel the same. The ergonomics of the Canon is what drew me in first and I really like the layout and the big jog dial/set button. Nikon doesn't have that and that's fine but I really like it. Add my glass in....yeah no real reason to switch.

6fps is so lame. Its too slow for sports and who cares for portraits. 4 fps on my MKII is perfect and 10 on my 1DMKIII is perfect. 6fps is pointless.

gh patriot wrote in post #14007827
6fps is so lame. Its too slow for sports and who cares for portraits. 4 fps on my MKII is perfect and 10 on my 1DMKIII is perfect. 6fps is pointless.

My guess is 6fps is just a side effect of the CPU being as fast as it is. I don't think they set out with fps in mind, when they designed the camera.

6 is better then 4, so what hell. Works for me.

6FPS is perfect for me... I felt the 7D's 8FPS was too much for me, and the 5D2 too slow... This is a very happy medium, for me.

I just never understood why you can only have "hi/lo" settings, and not selectable. Like if you want to go down from 6FPS to 5FPS, no problem. Or 4FPS or even 2 FPS... Etc...

Not that I have read the entire thread, but the progress of this thread loosely mimics that of 5 stages of grief:

1. Denial - "$3500!? Noooooooooo!!!"
2. Anger - "Canon ignores their consumer base!"
3. Bargaining - "If only 5DIII came with such and such..."
4. Depression - "Nikon is ahead with their D800..."
5. Acceptance - "Hey, high ISO shots don't look all that bad..."

I'll probably end up getting a 5DIII towards the end of the year unless rumors about imminent release of 5DIV are rampant by then.

Invertalon wrote in post #14007859
6FPS is perfect for me... I felt the 7D's 8FPS was too much for me, and the 5D2 too slow... This is a very happy medium, for me.

Agree. 6fps is perfect for most 5DC/5DMII users. Most of us wanted that extra 2-3 FPS and 6fps hits the spot. Its a perfect compromise for wedding/kids/travel/st​udio shooters.

Invertalon wrote in post #14007859
6FPS is perfect for me... I felt the 7D's 8FPS was too much for me, and the 5D2 too slow... This is a very happy medium, for me.

I just never understood why you can only have "hi/lo" settings, and not selectable. Like if you want to go down from 6FPS to 5FPS, no problem. Or 4FPS or even 2 FPS... Etc...

though


The 1DMKIII can adjust the high and low fps. I can set my MKIII at 7 or 9 of 6 or 4 or whatever I want.


I used to own a 40D at 6.5fps and it was ok ish for sports. Then I got my MKIII and it was perfect at 10. Shooting weddings or portraits I've never wished that I had more than 4 fps. Dont get me wrong, 6fps is nice but pointless in my opinion because anyone who shoots sports seriously will want higher frame rate. 6 is to fast for flash to recycle and too slow for sports. Its not great for anything. Joe mcnally doesn't shoot sports at 6, he uses the d3s at 9 or whatever and he never motor drives portraits. 6 is not a bad number of fps, just not really geared at any crowd specifically.

Tiggity-T wrote in post #14007407
LOUD NOISES!

are u blind? up to http://www.digitalrev.​com/photo_detail?id=26​27550 looks clean and more doable to me. at that ISO it looks as clean as my 400d at 800 ISO LOL

gh patriot wrote in post #14007827
6fps is so lame. Its too slow for sports and who cares for portraits. 6fps is pointless.

a crying shame, only 6 FPS

Invertalon wrote in post #14007859
6FPS is perfect for me... I felt the 7D's 8FPS was too much for me, and the 5D2 too slow... This is a very happy medium, for me.

I just never understood why you can only have "hi/lo" settings, and not selectable. Like if you want to go down from 6FPS to 5FPS, no problem. Or 4FPS or even 2 FPS... Etc...

If you go into quite mode, the fps drops to 3, so there are two settings at least.