Canon 5D Mark III Rumors

^There's nothing wrong with rumors.

jdizzle wrote in post #11601266
^There's nothing wrong with rumors.

Usually there is nothing right about them either.

Saxi wrote in post #11601317
Usually there is nothing right about them either.

That's why it's in the rumor section.

martial76 wrote in post #11598978
First, let me say that shooting with a nikon was weird!!! The aperature is on the front of the camera...

You can setup so the main dial (back) changes the aperture and the sub command dial (front) changes the shutter speed.

This is also customizable to work like Canon.

Blows out of the blackhole . I enjoy using the AF on D700 and also 7D.

The D700 just like other Nikon Pro bodies has several cluster setups. You can select 9, 21, and 51 as a cluster. You can move this cluster (except the 51) during shootings.

^Hi Mav! 400 VR II? Nice!!

Jdizzle Bdizzle , Julian....yeah I got a good deal bought used ~25% off so bought it. Heavy as hell but I use monopod almost all the time .

Are you waiting for 1Ds IV or 5D III, I wanna see what Canon will bring.....

jdizzle wrote in post #11601785
^Hi Mav! 400 VR II? Nice!!

maverick678 wrote in post #11601810
Jdizzle Bdizzle , Julian....yeah I got a good deal bought used ~25% off so bought it. Heavy as hell but I use monopod almost all the time .

Are you waiting for 1Ds IV or 5D III, I wanna see what Canon will bring.....

Whatever comes first. If the 5D III successor has AF like the 7D ( which is awesome!), I wouldn't hesitate to buy one.

The pattern never ends. Everyone is salivating over a MKIII to solve all their shortcomings as photographers. Then it will come out and they will complain about it, until rumors about the Mark IV hit the interwebz. Repeat pattern endlessly.

What a bunch of dupes.

JohnHemlock wrote in post #11601940
The pattern never ends. Everyone is salivating over a MKIII to solve all their shortcomings as photographers. Then it will come out and they will complain about it, until rumors about the Mark IV hit the interwebz. Repeat pattern endlessly.

What a bunch of dupes.

Then don't particiapte in this thread. By making such a remark, it's obvious that you're the DUPE.

Yeah same here *crossing my fingers*.

jdizzle wrote in post #11601887
Whatever comes first. If the 5D III successor has AF like the 7D ( which is awesome!), I wouldn't hesitate to buy one.

JohnHemlock wrote in post #11601940
The pattern never ends. Everyone is salivating over a MKIII to solve all their shortcomings as photographers. Then it will come out and they will complain about it, until rumors about the Mark IV hit the interwebz. Repeat pattern endlessly.

What a bunch of dupes.

The problem is the giant gaping hole in Canon's line up. It's not that I need a better camera to take better photos, I want a full frame camera in general but with the current line up the 1D is the only option and I am not spending 6K on a camera body. The 5D doesn't work for me because of the AF.

I agree she is a dupe

jdizzle wrote in post #11601973
Then don't particiapte in this thread. By making such a remark, it's obvious that you're the DUPE.

Doostur wrote in post #11540804
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!

True say, I'd pay for the D3.

martial76 wrote in post #11600096
3200??? With a 7d? You can see noise at 1600 iso on any image of any size! From an 8x10" print. Most of the prints I make are 8x10, 11x17 or 13x19. That's just what I can print at home. Even just goofing around if it gets dark enough to have to raise the iso to 800... I know I'm not going to get anything worth keeping.

Both the 5d and d700 are better iq at iso 5000 than the 7d at 1600

I'm not trying to bash the 7d... I love this camera. This is just my immediate reaction from shooting with a 7d for every day for a year, compared to spending one day shooting with a 5dii and a d700 and d3s another.

I'm a convert... Full frame is the only way to fly!

Didn't hear back from you, but if you can't get large prints out of 3200 ISO on the 7D then your not shooting right.

Saxi wrote in post #11603745
Didn't hear back from you, but if you can't get large prints out of 3200 ISO on the 7D then your not shooting right.

Was a busy weekend! From my experience... If I shoot at 1600 or higher, mainly doing pics of rock climbing at or a little after sunset (not in a well lit room) to where I am forced to have high shutter speeds to freeze action, there is always noise in the shadow areas of the photo. It's not the end of the world... Just have to reduce the noise (which LR3 actually does a pretty good job of). All I'm saying is with FF cameras, there is no noise to reduce!

The horrible high iso performance of the 7d is pretty well documented. You can say I'm not shooting right all you want... (apparently, neither do those that do the bench mark tests and publish the info) Doesn't change the fact that a FF camera is cleaner at ridiculously high iso than te 7d is at moderate settings. I really don't care what anyone says about it... I have seen the results, side by side and there is no comparison! I will keep the 7d as my second cam... But, I will be getting a full frame (as soon as one comes out that has a better AF system and burst rate that don't cost 7k)

Very cute kid!