Canon EOS 3D, will we finally see the unicorn?

rick_reno wrote in post #14572879
i think so, CR is reporting 4 additional bodies in 2012. Waiting until after Photokina in Sept. won't kill me.

Waiting won't hurt.

rick_reno wrote in post #14572879
i think so, CR is reporting 4 additional bodies in 2012. Waiting until after Photokina in Sept. won't kill me.

I originally moved in to the digital SLR market only a few months after the 5d Mark II came out. At that time, it was really the 85mm f/1.2L, the MP-E 65mm macro and the comparison in cost between the 200mm f/2.0L and the nikon equivalent that swayed me in it's direction. Well, those things and the large megapixel differences.

If I were to be starting out today, the only argument left for me to get canon is that macro lens. The results of the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 are more than close enough, their 200mm lens is still stupidly more expensive, but also comparable, and theirs is the bodywith all the megapixels now.

I am waiting to see what comes of these many rumours that are bubbling all over about a high MP body from canon, then I'll see what I am gonna do next.

Shadowblade wrote in post #14534930
The obvious solution would be to release a 4fps, compact-body version at $3k, or maybe $3.5k if it includes 4k video. .... (although cinematographers may appreciate the 4k video feature).

Why would they put 4K video in a $3,500 30MP camera, when they already announced a 4K 18.1MP camera for $15,000, and it isn't even out yet?

Forget the video, I want the eye-control AF back.

Lowner wrote in post #14583110
Forget the video, I want the eye-control AF back.

I want a camera not a f#$%n video camera. Why can't they just produce two bodies (ordered of course) one for stills and the other with video functions. Something like what nokin has done with their D800 and 800e bodies.

my name is always taken wrote in post #14587993
I want a camera not a f#$%n video camera. Why can't they just produce two bodies (ordered of course) one for stills and the other with video functions. Something like what nokin has done with their D800 and 800e bodies.

Canon management appears to like video.

So does Nikon. Biggest selling point by them of late: Finally achieved 1080p video...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14588125
So does Nikon. Biggest selling point by them of late: Finally achieved 1080p video...

Yep, video might the "it" of photography in the future. I personally have never tried it, probably my geezerness kicking in. When I think about it, visions of Walter Brennan limping up and **** about it come into play.

To do it properly takes a little investment in the right tools but the ability to even just rip a quick 30 seconds of hand held footage that might sell in addition to stills (and have that video be true broadcast quality HD) is really quite handy.

It's all about offering clients and potential clients more...

rick_reno wrote in post #14588241
Yep, video might the "it" of photography in the future. I personally have never tried it, probably my geezerness kicking in. When I think about it, visions of Walter Brennan limping up and **** about it come into play.

Maybe for events and photojournalism, but are you really going to stick a video in your wedding album, or hang a video of a landscape on your wall?

Shadowblade wrote in post #14588464
Maybe for events and photojournalism, but are you really going to stick a video in your wedding album, or hang a video of a landscape on your wall?

they actually do stick DVD videos in wedding albums

watt100 wrote in post #14588694
they actually do stick DVD videos in wedding albums

Which are normally taken by a separate videographer, not the same person who's taking the photos.

And, really, when you look back at a wedding, you normally flip through all the photos (or look at them on screen) - you don't load up the video and watch the 30 minutes or whatever of edited footage each time.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14588248
To do it properly takes a little investment in the right tools but the ability to even just rip a quick 30 seconds of hand held footage that might sell in addition to stills (and have that video be true broadcast quality HD) is really quite handy.

It's all about offering clients and potential clients more...

Good point.
Though I think they should still produce two models one with one with out video.

my name is always taken wrote in post #14590181
Though I think they should still produce two models one with one with out video.

Why? The version without would probably make it more expensive.

my name is always taken wrote in post #14590181
Good point.
Though I think they should still produce two models one with one with out video.

that would get very expensive to build, and I don't think we'll ever see one without again from Canon.