NEW 5D RUMOUR !!

ThomGascoigne wrote in post #6285446
It's 7D guys not 5D MK II, It would seem they save the "MK's" for the high end stuff. I'm an avid Canon fan, But gee whiz that Sony A900 Looks tasty.. Real tasty

ulrikft wrote in post #6285465
the a900 sure looks good actually in body IS, better iso-performance than many gives it credit for, good build quality, weatherproofing... The problem is getting rid of my fullframe canon mount lenses (70-200, 85 1.8, 50 1.4, 24 1.4) and getting replacement sony lenses.. (pheeew, expensive :P). My alternative glass is easy, just get a few m42-sony adapters I can re-shim my rokkors and just put adapters on my Zeisses :P

wagh! you guys serious about changing a whole system on the strength on one model release??? Your photography must be super critical., and Im sure you know your market, but would these differences between the sony release and the Canon 5D (specifically) make such a diference to your pockets, or are they so deep anyway it makes no difference to you? (in which case why not stick with Canon and get the 1Dsmk3 - there's no way you'll get better results witha sony, so if money's no object....)

(only asking not criticising)

I Simonius wrote in post #6285557
wagh! you guys serious about changing a whole system on the strength on one model release??? Your photography must be super critical., and Im sure you know your market, but would these differences between the sony release and the Canon 5D (specifically) make such a diference to your pockets, or are they so deep anyway it makes no difference to you? (in which case why not stick with Canon and get the 1Dsmk3 - there's no way you'll get better results witha sony, so if money's no object....)

(only asking not criticising)

Serious and serious.. more like thinking out loud.

My issue with canon is that they seem to like crippling lower end models to protect higher end ones, while sony, nikon, olympus, pentax and other put pro-like features in their lower end bodies too. This is an attitude I prefer over canon's. The reason why sony is tempting is the mount, which makes it possible to use alternative glass like rokkor 58 1.2 etc.

We can only hope that the coming 5d replacement will signal an attitude change

(and all the money in the world won't make the 1ds mark III the formfactor/size of the d700/a900/5d... )

ulrikft wrote in post #6285602
Serious and serious.. more like thinking out loud.

My issue with canon is that they seem to like crippling lower end models to protect higher end ones, while sony, nikon, olympus, pentax and other put pro-like features in their lower end bodies too. This is an attitude I prefer over canon's. The reason why sony is tempting is the mount, which makes it possible to use alternative glass like rokkor 58 1.2 etc.

We can only hope that the coming 5d replacement will signal an attitude change

(and all the money in the world won't make the 1ds mark III the formfactor/size of the d700/a900/5d... )

I don't totally agree with the posit that Canon has not matriculated their higher end features to their lower end models. I can think of several examples where they have done just that. In fact, recent reviews of the XSi note the number of features that have already moved down from the Mark III series.

The most glaring omission is the weather sealing. I maintain, though, that saying your camera is weather sealed vs it actually being the tank tough unit that the 1 series represents are two totally different things. For instance, the olympus cameras are not said to be "weather sealed" but said to be "splash proof", at least in their own materials. I am sure the system is effective -- I just don't know if its the same as the canon weather protection on the 1 series.

With that said, I have shot with my 40D in light rain -- still works!

Well, the olympus cameras have been shown to work (with and without popup flash active :P ) while being drained by a faucet. (norwegian review). That is much more water than I would dare put my 30d into.

mattograph wrote in post #6285721
I don't totally agree with the posit that Canon has not matriculated their higher end features to their lower end models. I can think of several examples where they have done just that. )

I think also there may be some merit in not throwing out technology into the latest model just for the sake of it bacause from the reviews Ive seen so far it seems the 1Ds3 is still ahead in terms of IQ (not MP) compared to the newer offerings by other manufacturers..
what I mean by this is that I would still rather have a 5D2 that purely, in terms of the IQ it can produce, is ahead of everything else in preference to higher MPs o other technobits.

I would rather have an 18MP 5D which retains the magic 'p;lastic' quality orf the images than a 24MP one that does no more than mimic the 1Ds3, which which I have not been impressed from the two chances I had to try it out.

However if i needed a camer to shoot penuins in raging surf or sililar than I might need superweathersaling but rain proof is all I actually need , so again I don't see trhe need to have every high end attribute migrated immediately to the lower end just for the sake of bragging rights ofr the manufacturers

So whether sony, noink , omlympus or anyone, brought out an all singing all dancing 'I got more technocred than you' model I would still only be swayed by a camera that fulfilled my needs for my photography with the emphasis over and above all had the level of IQ that I desire. so that means noise, DR, and a host of other terms that equate to exceptional IQ.

From what Ive seen so far none of the new offerings offer anything on that level that even matches current models from Canon, never mind forthcoming ones...

You would have a valid point if nikon and sony was far behind on IQ, but they aren't. The 1ds Mark III is somewhat a step in front of things, but that was not the camera i was critiquing. The d700/d3 combo is nowhere _behind_ the 5d in IQ the way I see it. The 5d can hope to match the d700/d3 on iso 100/200, but that is it. It doesen't even come close at higher isos, and that is natural, it is an older camera. But what does perfect IQ help if you can't get the shot beacause it is a light drissle outside? What does perfect IQ help if you don't dare getting into the halfpipe to shoot the snowboarders in case you get spreyed with wet snow?

ulrikft wrote in post #6286159
You would have a valid point if nikon and sony was far behind on IQ, but they aren't. The 1ds Mark III is somewhat a step in front of things, but that was not the camera i was critiquing. The d700/d3 combo is nowhere _behind_ the 5d in IQ the way I see it. The 5d can hope to match the d700/d3 on iso 100/200, but that is it. It doesen't even come close at higher isos, and that is natural, it is an older camera. But what does perfect IQ help if you can't get the shot beacause it is a light drissle outside? What does perfect IQ help if you don't dare getting into the halfpipe to shoot the snowboarders in case you get spreyed with wet snow?

And what does perfect IQ help if you can't get the snowboarder in focus? These are the types of considerations that for some reason some people never seem to understand. IQ uber alles, as if no other aspect of the camera were necessary to actually obtain a photo that takes advantage of that IQ. Maybe they're all still life or product photographers

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #6286194
And what does perfect IQ help if you can't get the snowboarder in focus? These are the types of considerations that for some reason some people never seem to understand. IQ uber alles, as if no other aspect of the camera were necessary to actually obtain a photo that takes advantage of that IQ. Maybe they're all still life or product photographers

I agree totally

If you can't get the shot, what does "perfect IQ" help? Right now, you have a d700/d3 that competes with the 5d at their iso 200 against the 5d's iso 100, and do this _very_ well. At the same time they have weather sealing, better/faster af, more bells and whistles that actually help you _get_ the shot with perfect IQ.

There are lot of small things I would love in my 30d, that my friend has in his d80, small things that many see as unimportant, but that are important for me.. spot metering at all af-points as an example. This makes it much easier for me to do quick, spontanous and candid portraits.

I understand that all the needs _I_ have, can't be incorporated into every camera, but it would be nice to see some :P

Wow, D80 has AF point-linked spot metering? Awesome. Yet another feature Canon have so far jealously and unnecessarily reserved for the 1-series.

Repeating myself again here (but we're sooooo close to the 5DII announcement, it's ok right?), but a D700 feature set with a Canon sensor at $3000 would be a killer camera. I still hold out very slim hope for the 5DII to be such a camera, but doing so would mean Canon changing their longstanding product differentiation philosophy. I can't see how in the current market climate they can continue to hold that philosophy with the D700 and (to a lesser extent) A900 out, but at the same time I can see it because it's Canon after all. We'll know soon, hopefully next week!

ulrikft wrote in post #6286159
You would have a valid point if nikon and sony was far behind on IQ, but they aren't. The 1ds Mark III is somewhat a step in front of things, but that was not the camera i was critiquing. The d700/d3 combo is nowhere _behind_ the 5d in IQ the way I see it. The 5d can hope to match the d700/d3 on iso 100/200, but that is it. It doesen't even come close at higher isos, and that is natural, it is an older camera. But what does perfect IQ help if you can't get the shot beacause it is a light drissle outside? What does perfect IQ help if you don't dare getting into the halfpipe to shoot the snowboarders in case you get spreyed with wet snow?

fairly obviously the 5D2 will have some sort of raincoat- that's a given..

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #6286194
And what does perfect IQ help if you can't get the snowboarder in focus? These are the types of considerations that for some reason some people never seem to understand. IQ uber alles, as if no other aspect of the camera were necessary to actually obtain a photo that takes advantage of that IQ. Maybe they're all still life or product photographers

snow boarfder shooters should get the 1D3, that's what it's for , the 5D was never (obviously:rolleyes aimed at that market. It was aimed at Portrait/wedding and landscapers mainly.

The new 5D will have more AF points so it will still be ahead of the game for the market it is intended for:p

ulrikft wrote in post #6286225
I agree totally

If you can't get the shot, what does "perfect IQ" help? Right now, you have a d700/d3 that competes with the 5d at their iso 200 against the 5d's iso 100, and do this _very_ well. At the same time they have weather sealing, better/faster af, more bells and whistles that actually help you _get_ the shot with perfect IQ.

There are lot of small things I would love in my 30d, that my friend has in his d80, small things that many see as unimportant, but that are important for me.. spot metering at all af-points as an example. This makes it much easier for me to do quick, spontanous and candid portraits.

I understand that all the needs _I_ have, can't be incorporated into every camera, but it would be nice to see some :P

So you're comapring a newly revealed set of cameras in late 2008 against a 3 yrs old camera? - why?

That is not even relevant, the 5dmk2 will have all the bels and whistles necessary to keep ahead of the game for the intended market (i.e. not sports shooters - for them the comparison must be with the 1d3)

You seem to be a slow reader simon

1) Canon does not HAVE a competitor in the price/size range the d700 is, other than the 5d.

2) "get a 1d" is just not an answer, I would like you to stop using that excuse. When ALL the competitors have features at a _far_ lower price point AND a with a far smaller body, I don't see that as a very valid excuse.

You are making a lot of assumptions and you put up _lots_ of borders for what you think is valid arguments, I don't like that. At all. Be honest, that is far better

ulrikft wrote in post #6287379
AND a with a far smaller body,

I quite like a decent sized body, having held the 350d it felt weird with it being so small, kind of like a girls camera

jbuk1975 wrote in post #6287407
I quite like a decent sized body, having held the 350d it felt weird with it being so small, kind of like a girls camera

Smaller than a 1d..