The latest on the 5D Mk3

snappy7 wrote in post #11296787
Yep, I wanted coverage

And did you want to get in trouble for cross-posting? Check the Forum Rules on that. We don't like it. If you post in the right place, you'll get your question answered. If you post in the wrong place as well you'll alienate a lot of members.

LOL

Just give it one focus point, that's all anyone needs anyway

42MP

50 different video modes


Seriously though, it's all speculation at the moment.

Hopefully they actually improve the AF system or they'll be committing economic suicide... well probably people will buy it anyway, just for the 42MP.

I wouldn't want 42 MP, you'd have to be glued to a tripod.

Lazuka wrote in post #11297507
I wouldn't want 42 MP, you'd have to be glued to a tripod.

That's OK, they'll probably build IS into the body.

Do you think it will stay FF?

Nah, 3.5x crop.

Lazuka wrote in post #11297507
I wouldn't want 42 MP, you'd have to be glued to a tripod.

I've been glued to worse.

Lazuka wrote in post #11297507
I wouldn't want 42 MP, you'd have to be glued to a tripod.

No you wouldn't, no more than now.

Lazuka wrote in post #11297530
Nah, 3.5x crop.

I don't know why they need to make it FF, APS-C is good enough for movie making.


I suppose they could put in a video crop mode thingy.

RDKirk wrote in post #11297545
No you wouldn't, no more than now.

Ever shoot with a d3x, or medium format? there's more camera shake picked up because of the detail resolution.

Lazuka wrote in post #11297507
I wouldn't want 42 MP, you'd have to be glued to a tripod.

Ouch...... plus I'd have to buy a six-pack of new TB drives to hold the RAW files; naaaahhhh - that would be pointless since my 6-year old CPU probably couldn't handle the capacity.....

But sRAW1 would be 21MP.

tim wrote in post #11296962
So... you want a D3s then? Even the 2 year old D700 beats the 5DII for most things.

The high ISO performance of the 5DII is already pretty amazing, giving a useful ISO6400, and an almost clean ISO1600. 20 years ago photographers were working with ISO400, and even the 300D I started with 5-7 years ago had a practical limit of ISO800. Sure you want want more, but if people can't work with what they have now they'll probably never be happy.

I agree with the last part of your statement. However, you can't expect camera manufacturers to stop upgrading their gear. If they did so, they would soon run out of business and we'd all switch to Nikon. Also, I am extremely happy with my 5DII, but I wouldn't mind having a tad bit better AF and video functionality.

Also, on a broader note, I don't think most people's gear lust will ever die down hehe. Only way to stop wanting new things is to stop reading up on gear

Lazuka wrote in post #11297560
Ever shoot with a d3x, or medium format? there's more camera shake picked up because of the detail resolution.

I've shot with Kodak Technical Pan and H&W in 35mm, both of which had significantly higher resolution than a 24mp sensor. And yes, I just sold my Mamiya RZ67 cameras a few months ago, and I sold my 4x5 camera last year. I had been using medium format since 1970.

The shutter speed controls camera shake, period. The size of blur recorded by 1/60 of a second is independent of the resolution of the film or sensor or even format behind the shutter. In 1/60 of a second, the image is going to move a specific distance across the focus plane--the composition of the light-sensitive medium is irrelevant to that.

The only thing that makes a difference will be the degree of magnification to the final display image size. That indicates the degree to which the motion blur is enlarged, and thus whether it reaches visual discernibly in the final image. If your hand-held 8x10 images were sharp enough with a lower resolving sensor, they will still be sharp enough with a higher resolving sensor. The sensor does not make any difference to the size of the blur admitted by a given shutter speed.

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #11297605
But sRAW1 would be 21MP.

Your absolutely right Ninja..... but then I'd be hard pressed to ignore all those other MP's knowing they were "available."

A lot of people jump into camera's like the nikon d3x (read the reviews on bh about it) and end up sending it back because more resolution exploits bad shooting techinques. There is a reason they're studio cameras. Blads are even worse for that.