Canon 5D Mark III Rumors

I'm pretty sure that Canon will step up for the next 5D as well. They rode the Mk II partly on the popularity that it's innovative video allowed, but that advantage is drying up as competitors catch up with Canon. They need to make a reasonably-priced Nikon killer full-frame body and that's all there is to it.

Auto focus when filming would be very very very useful
Better focusing generally on stills and more FPS.

Dubchester wrote in post #11534333
Auto focus when filming would be very very very useful

An absolute must. After a couple of years I must confess the usefulness for filming has worn off. Sure it's been fun, but unless on a tripod is a bit pointless given the simply ergonomics of a DSLR body with a lens attached it make camera shake completely unavoidable; meaning you might as well spend a couple of hundred quid on a dedicated film camera.

That said, some of the footage I have got out it on a tripod with some of my lenses is simply wonderful; so I don't for a moment 'resent' the new technology, just wish I would remember not to leave my settings on such tight apertures. Things fall out of focus quickly

Dubchester wrote in post #11534333
Better focusing generally on stills and more FPS.

I got a 1Ds3 a while ago and basically got everything I always wanted out of my 5D2, though film mode, the 5D2's ISO, and a menu that doesn't remind me of my old 40D, would have been nice; and it's built like a beauty! Focusing and FPS were the the two chief things that caused me so much frustration with my 5D2; hopeless in both departments unless you get lucky. That said, a wonderful camera; not letting my original one go for many years; I can still whip it out in public without to many heads turning

As I sit here and rotate my thumbs, I'd really love to buy the 5D2. Knowing there is a good chance of the 5D3 right around the corner, I can't justify the new 5D2 cost. I really believe that the 5D3 will be the camera to beat and will be very impressive. Knowing that the 5D2 lasted 2 years, and is still one of the top cameras, I wont feel bad paying full pop for the D3.

I have a 7D with the 17-55 IS, and barrowed a 5D with a 17-40L. Some say full frame is overrated, for me its not. Also for me shooting in somewhat low light conditions was enough for me to jump ship. I can only imagine the D3, which will pretty much will be a 7d+5d with some addtional upgrades!

If you feel like you need to jump ship, then do it, the grass is always greener on the other side. I suspect if you go D700 now and then in half a year, when you finally settled down with some lenses and got use to the camera, the 5D3 will come out and you will want to switch again, lol.

Saxi wrote in post #11533809
I have enough for a father w/ camera and no income from it. I also have faith Canon will step up with the new 5D. If they don't though, I would seriously consider it since the cost to upgrade to the 5D won't be all that different than going to Nikon. I really like the Canon system (minus AF/Speedlite which I believe Nikon clearly is superior).

You're not alone, we're just not the most vocal lot considering this is primarily a Canon forum but there are far more ppl that share your sentiment around here than you might think. Nikon seems to give it all they've got with their new bodies and they are a much smaller company with far fewer resources. Despite all the 5DII banter, Canon does not offer any competition to the D700 whatsoever. There is no fast, ff camera with pro-quality af to be found in the Canon lineup, they'd rather have you buy 2 bodies instead and smile because you get to buy glass at a slightly cheaper price. I've never owned anything but Canon gear and I honestly want Canon to win, but I'm not heavily invested by any means. My switch will be swift and painless if Canon doesn't stop trying to protect the sales of cameras that aren't even on the radar for 95% of their customer base i.e. the admittedly excellent 1 series bodies.

No gear lust, no mental anguish, no visions of miraculous improvements in my ability to take photos, just the most versatile body my money can buy. I'm one of the old fashioned guys who still believes a company must act like they actually WANT my continued business, a true fossil in this day and age....

Stone 13 wrote in post #11542047
You're not alone, we're just not the most vocal lot considering this is primarily a Canon forum but there are far more ppl that share your sentiment around here than you might think. Nikon seems to give it all they've got with their new bodies and they are a much smaller company with far fewer resources. Despite all the 5DII banter, Canon does not offer any competition to the D700 whatsoever. There is no fast, ff camera with pro-quality af to be found in the Canon lineup, they'd rather have you buy 2 bodies instead and smile because you get to buy glass at a slightly cheaper price. I've never owned anything but Canon gear and I honestly want Canon to win, but I'm not heavily invested by any means. My switch will be swift and painless if Canon doesn't stop trying to protect the sales of cameras that aren't even on the radar for 95% of their customer base i.e. the admittedly excellent 1 series bodies.

No gear lust, no mental anguish, no visions of miraculous improvements in my ability to take photos, just the most versatile body my money can buy. I'm one of the old fashioned guys who still believes a company must act like they actually WANT my continued business, a true fossil in this day and age....

Very well put and my feelings as well. Unfortunately it is considered taboo to feel way and we are generally out of our minds and should just immediately give up and buy a d700.

Haven't heard many happy with the 1D IV.

Lots of praise for the Nikon D700 over the 5DMKII when it comes to autofocus but I believe that the D700 CANNOT match the 5dMKII in resolution and IQ.Don't forget The 5DMKII IS a landscape/portrait camera,not really a "sports" camera.
Paul

I just wish Canon would release a firmware update that added auto iso to the 1DsIII....it's such a cool feature on the 5DII and 7D cameras. Although the 7D has a better implementation in Manual mode....it's effectively iso priority mode, where the 5DII is stuck at iso 400 in M.

canon rookie wrote in post #11542500
Lots of praise for the Nikon D700 over the 5DMKII when it comes to autofocus but I believe that the D700 CANNOT match the 5dMKII in resolution and IQ.Don't forget The 5DMKII IS a landscape/portrait camera,not really a "sports" camera.
Paul

Have a look at the D700 flickr group for your answer to that question, the difference in IQ is minimal if there is any difference at all. The 5DII obviously murders it in resolution & video capability.

Don't take my post as a sign of any anti-Canon sentiment. I'm hoping for either the 5DIII or some all new high performance ff body from Canon to satisfy my needs in 2011. Until then, I'm perfectly happy shooting with my 450D I'm sure it's still better at taking photos than the idiot behind the shutter..lol!!!

5 Reasons to upgrade your mark II for the mark III :

1. Resolving moire and aliasing issues
2. Built-in ND-filtering
3. Rolling shutter correction
4. 60fps, 120fps or even 300fps
5. HD output to monitor

Seriously, Saxi. You mention several times you "had" to buy the 7D, while, as a matter of fact, no-one forced you to do anything but yourself. Like someone else said, you could have looked, or even now start looking, for a used 1DsIII, or even a 1DsII. AF performance in the latter is about as good as it gets, the mkIII is probably even a tad better. This is, if you want to stick with Canon, which really no-one is forcing you to. This is really just whining from your end.

Battery life,because of the substantially larger size, is better in the 1D-series than in the 5D/7D. Simple as that.

If you were to buy a D700, a 24-70, a 85/1.8 and an SB900 from B&H, it will run you between 4800-5000 depending on you buying grey market or US warranty. If you were to sell your 7D,17-55,580EX,85/1.8 and 70-200/4, you could probably net just above 3 grand. Thus, it would not cost you "over 5000" to jump ship. Whether you can afford those 2 grand or not is up to you. Compromises will have to be made, either way.

arild8515 wrote in post #11551802
Seriously, Saxi. You mention several times you "had" to buy the 7D, while, as a matter of fact, no-one forced you to do anything but yourself. Like someone else said, you could have looked, or even now start looking, for a used 1DsIII, or even a 1DsII. AF performance in the latter is about as good as it gets, the mkIII is probably even a tad better. This is, if you want to stick with Canon, which really no-one is forcing you to. This is really just whining from your end.

Battery life,because of the substantially larger size, is better in the 1D-series than in the 5D/7D. Simple as that.

If you were to buy a D700, a 24-70, a 85/1.8 and an SB900 from B&H, it will run you between 4800-5000 depending on you buying grey market or US warranty. If you were to sell your 7D,17-55,580EX,85/1.8 and 70-200/4, you could probably net just above 3 grand. Thus, it would not cost you "over 5000" to jump ship. Whether you can afford those 2 grand or not is up to you. Compromises will have to be made, either way.

Of course I was not forced with a gun to my head, but I was forced because of the hole in the Canon line up. I wanted to upgrade from the 50D to a 5D II. Because it lacks a good AF system and competitive FPS I went the 7D route. I want to be in a FF body, but Canon's line up prevents that, and I didn't want to go a used 1D III (or spend the cost of a new one). The 7D was a huge upgrade from the 50D and I am glad I made the switch, but it isn't where I want to be and it costs me a lot of money in the end to make this 'temporary' step regardless if I go to a 5D III when it comes out or switch to Nikon.

No one is whining, I am just stating my opinion, because it differs from yours does not make it whining. It is a valid point and I am not the only one who feels the same way. Silence never solves anything.

Saxi wrote in post #11552182
I wanted to upgrade from the 50D to a 5D II. Because it lacks a good AF system and competitive FPS I went the 7D route. I want to be in a FF body, but Canon's line up prevents that, and I didn't want to go a used 1D III (or spend the cost of a new one). The 7D was a huge upgrade from the 50D and I am glad I made the switch, but it isn't where I want to be and it costs me a lot of money in the end to make this 'temporary' step regardless if I go to a 5D III when it comes out or switch to Nikon.

No one is whining, I am just stating my opinion, because it differs from yours does not make it whining. It is a valid point and I am not the only one who feels the same way. Silence never solves anything.

Valid points, for sure. I've been pretty much in the same situation myself. I was "forced" to go for a 7D when I upgraded. From the point of user experience, the 7D just wins with better features. The 5DII is too lacking in the AF department compared to the 7D. I sold my 5DII and I'm waiting for a FF replacement... I won't get rid of my 7D though, that will stay as I like to use several bodies.