Canon 5D Mark III Rumors

I blame leica for all the no-AA hype.

Shadowblade wrote in post #13901201
Not a good idea for Canon - it would leave them with a full-capability action camera (1Dx), a cut-down action camera (5D3), no hi-resolution body for landscape/studio work, and no high pixel density body for wildlife/birds/other long telephoto use. Compare that with Nikon's D4 (action) and D800 (full-capability high-resolution and high pixel density camera, able to cover both areas due to good AF) and Canon comes out the loser.

Canon would come out the loser in that scenario only if you value super hi res. For high frame rate action the two companies have roughly equivalent bodies in the D4 and 1DX. Below that you have Nikon's high-res, low fps, pro AF D800 going up against Canon's (rumored, I pain to remind myself) medium res, medium fps, pro AF 5Dwhateveritscalled. Other specs remain to be seen but those are the headliners.

Is the 5Dwhatever really a loser? It's basically the camera a whole bunch of us have been waiting for--a highly capable all-rounder in a chopped down body. You say Canon would have no answer for the D800; well I say Nikon would have no answer to the 5Dwhatever. As much as we want Canon and Nikon to have equivalent bodies to make comparisons easier it looks like once again they'll avoid going toe-to-toe in the mid-price segment.

I think both cameras will find their happy users, although potentially there are more disappointed Nikon users than there will be Canon users. Nikon users go from D700 to D800 and get a rather different animal--res goes way up, fps goes down. The D800's strengths don't line up with D700's, although there are improvements in other areas like AF, metering, and video that should entice quite a few upgraders. Canon users go from 5DII to 5Dwhatever, and the 5Dwhatever covers all of the 5DII's capabilities and builds on them by adding pro AF and higher fps without losing anything. Who do you think will be happier in general? D700 users who want to upgrade or 5DII users who want to upgrade?

^^^
FPS looks to be the only weak point compared to the D700 that I can see, so it's pretty much the same animal for most things imo.

dgrPhotos wrote in post #13902102
I blame leica for all the no-AA hype.

I just hope Nikon license Fuji's new sensor RBG arrangement for their next cam.

Shadowblade wrote in post #13898535
For wedding photography, obviously. For landscapes, how large do you print? Do you exhibit them in galleries and exhibitions, with people sticking their noses right into the prints?

You know, too...high DPI prints really do look better, so I would love 36mp for a 13x19. Obviously 10 or 12mp makes a fantastic one, but I've printed a few 40mp-ish stitches at 16x24/13x19 size, and they look *great*, noticeably better upon close scrutiny. So if you can choose between "very good" and "Great!", why not take "great!".

Also, those tools that let you pan/zoom around images online might be fun to use on high mp images. Not to mention cropping...or cropping to other aspect ratios.

And last but not least:

I hope to God we won't be stuck at 2560x1XXX rez forever for our monitors. Let alone consumer screens with 1080p. I want my 300dpi 27" screen please. We've gone backwards from the T221, unfortunately. Sigh. :P

woos wrote in post #13902407
I hope to God we won't be stuck at 2560x1XXX rez forever for our monitors. Let alone consumer screens with 1080p. I want my 300dpi 27" screen please. We've gone backwards from the T221, unfortunately. Sigh. :P

Supply and demand. If the demand is low, no one is willing to supply. You may just have to build your own 300dpi monitor.

You can put 6 monitor together to get a bigger screen!
http://techreport.com/​r.x/eyefinity6/hawx-six.jpg

^^^
Just those damn bezels get in the way!

dgrPhotos wrote in post #13902102
I blame leica for all the no-AA hype.

The M9 is a fantastic piece of hardware. No company out there can compete with it since it's the only FF rangefinder on the market.

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #13902131
I think both cameras will find their happy users, although potentially there are more disappointed Nikon users than there will be Canon users. Nikon users go from D700 to D800 and get a rather different animal--res goes way up, fps goes down. The D800's strengths don't line up with D700's, although there are improvements in other areas like AF, metering, and video that should entice quite a few upgraders. Canon users go from 5DII to 5Dwhatever, and the 5Dwhatever covers all of the 5DII's capabilities and builds on them by adding pro AF and higher fps without losing anything. Who do you think will be happier in general? D700 users who want to upgrade or 5DII users who want to upgrade?

Yes! It's funny how both these cameras have swapped concept so clearly. I can just imagine a Canon rep eyeing the (then) new D700...passing a memo to the R&D department that says something like "for the next 5D, go easy on the MP but get cute with the fps and AF system". And when the 5DII got released i can imagine a Nikon Rep eyeing the new Canon thinking "ok R&D guys, screw the fps and AF....just hike the MP....that's what's needed!"....and violla both cameras swap personality in a stroke of a generation. It's quite amusing if you think about it. It's almost as if neither camera brand had confidence in their own strategy.

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #13903636
It's quite amusing if you think about it. It's almost as if neither camera brand had confidence in their own strategy.

It's nice to see Canon and Nikon executives also suffer from "the grass is always greener" syndrome like so many of us.

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #13903636
Yes! It's funny how both these cameras have swapped concept so clearly. I can just imagine a Canon rep eyeing the (then) new D700...passing a memo to the R&D department that says something like "for the next 5D, go easy on the MP but get cute with the fps and AF system". And when the 5DII got released i can imagine a Nikon Rep eyeing the new Canon thinking "ok R&D guys, screw the fps and AF....just hike the MP....that's what's needed!"....and violla both cameras swap personality in a stroke of a generation. It's quite amusing if you think about it. It's almost as if neither camera brand had confidence in their own strategy.

I thought the same actually...

http://www.youtube.com …_7W8E-bi8&feature=related

food for thought!

bfleck51 wrote in post #13903832
http://www.youtube.com …_7W8E-bi8&feature=related

food for thought!

Food for fake.

Uploaded to youtube 8 july 2011, and has been declared fake 2345 times since then.

woos wrote in post #13902407
You know, too...high DPI prints really do look better, so I would love 36mp for a 13x19. Obviously 10 or 12mp makes a fantastic one, but I've printed a few 40mp-ish stitches at 16x24/13x19 size, and they look *great*, noticeably better upon close scrutiny. So if you can choose between "very good" and "Great!", why not take "great!".

Also, those tools that let you pan/zoom around images online might be fun to use on high mp images. Not to mention cropping...or cropping to other aspect ratios.

That's my point exactly!

Anyone who thinks 18MP is enough obviously doesn't print large enough!