Equipment The 5D Mark III Thread

So the 5D MkIII is finally out.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/
http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/02/canon-announces-eos-5d-mark-iii-22-3mp-full-frame-sensor-6-fps/
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/new...ark-iii-speedlite-radio-flash-system-and-more



Key specs:

- 22.3 Megapixel full-frame sensor
- 61-point autofocus
- Up to 6fps continuous shooting
- Native ISO 100-25,600 sensitivity
- Full HD video with manual control
- 14-bit DIGIC 5+ processor
- Enhanced Weather sealing
- 8.11cm (3.2-inch) 1,040,000-dot screen
- HDR mode with presets


The bits that make me happy

1. ISO performance appears to be awesome. Clean images up to 12800. This is ridiculous for someone who shoots mostly at night, but with a 50D that is effectively limited by noise and DR to 2000 ISO.

2. Bigger than the 5D2 - I like the heft and grip of bigger DSLRs. Add a grip onto this bad boy and I'm even happier. Which brings me to...

3. New BG-E11 grip, with the joystick on the grip! Full-featured portrait shooting ahoy!

4. High fps - I will probably continue to use the 50D as my airshow cam because of the crop factor, but having 6fps shooting on a full-frame body only makes life easier for, say event photography or catching "that moment" when shooting portraits in demanding situations (weddings?).

5. AE bracket/HDR - Auto-HDR doesn't really interest me, but the expanded AE bracket is very welcome.

6. New AF system - it's from the 1D X. Yes, $7K AF in a $3.5K camera. It won't have the tracking performance of the 1D X because it doesn't have the same metering module (the 5D3 uses the 7D meter) but it's still a bold move. Canon really needed to up their game in the AF department (esp 5D bodies) and they've delivered like Anon.


Thoughts?

 

I shoot with an old 5D "classic" at the moment and have been putting off upgrading because I wanted to wait for the MKIII. The spec look amazing!

For me, most import features, compared to MKII, are:
- 100% viewfinder
- Improved AF (don't need 61 points, just needs to be accurate and fast)
- and most importantly : High ISO, Low Noise Performance!

But the expected retail price is around 3.500Euro, which I'm afraid is a bit above my budget, I was hoping for something around 2.500 - 2.750 Euro.

 

As an upgrade, it's pretty impressive. Most of all it's the upgraded AF, which was the biggest problem with the 5DII, coupled with incremental upgrades in the other areas that I would expect after this many years.

Canon's decision to keep the 5DII in place as a lower end solution is interesting, and probably the right choice, as it provides full frame to the sub-£1500 end of the market. However, the £3000 price tag of the Mark III is a big one - I paid £3500 for a 1D Mark III at launch, and no matter how you shake it the 5DIII isn't a 1D series camera. Basically, it's just continuing the ever increasing prices of high end cameras. The 5DIII should have been £2500, ie: the old 5DII launch price. Yet again we've got this huge jump from the £1500 region to £3000+.

I think the big question is the D800's higher resolution. I'm personally fine with the fact that Canon have stuck with a 'low' resolution camera - the megapixel race is supposed to be over after all, and we've accepted the fact that cramming more pixels into a finite space is a bad thing. The 1D-X is 18MP, the D4 is 16.2. However, I can see the uninformed assuming more is better.

I'm going to wait for the reviews to come out, but I'm probably going to shake my kit up. I'll probably take a 1D-X and a pair of 5DIIIs.

 

Wonder what the 1080p video is like and if it takes longer to burn through a full battery (in 20 minutes) like the MKII.

 

The new AF system sounds amazing!
Will be awesome to compare the two of them.

 

Looks like Canon have gone the same route as Nikon and their upgraded "budget" full frame camera is much more like a pro body in terms of price. Clever move by them IMO, because the 5D2 would never have sold as well in that price bracket.

 

What is this?! Someone stuck a Canon badge on my Nikon D800?!?!

Why Nikon, why?! I didn't want 36MP. Well here's to seeing the DPreview high ISO noise comparisons between this and the D800. While I'm a Nikon user, I can't say I'm happy with the direction of the D800. Although the D800E looks interesting, I don't understand why the megapixel race is back on- I wanted it to end and just have Nikon or Canon drop a better performing 16-18MP sensor and be done with it.

 

I never had a battery die that quick :S you sure theres nothing wrong with it ?


The MKIII will be my next upgrade I'm not too fussed with the price tag just means more saving really it is exactly what I wanted from the MKII I think you will be surprised at how many sell also how many Nikon lovers jump ship back to Canon.

 

I won't be one of them.

 

Me neither, on account of the fact that I don't have many thousands of pounds.

 

Why would a Nikon owner do this anyway? D800 costs less, and we already have Nikon lenses... Which serious video makers use with adapters to fit canon bodies anyway. As a still camera I fail to see what wil mke me sell all my cameras and bodies and change to canon.

 

Yep, with standard Canon battery and aftermarket one I get about 20 minutes in 1080p30 on the latest firmware. After the second battery I have to let it cool down because it overheats too (on a tripod - I'm not holding it). I would hope they fixed that.

 

Pook I think you have a great body, please don't sell it.

 

I'm just easily attracted by nice looking things. Of course I'll be staying with Nikon, because I just have Nikon kit anyway.

 

I can shoot all day on one battery in 1080p on the d7000. That sounds wrong to me... 20 mins?

Edit....


In fact, I remember shooting around 2 hours of 1080, hundreds of photos, and having it switched on all day, and reviewing images and videos on the screen All day too... All in temps of -16c.

20 mins????

 

Yes, the price is a bit much to swallow, but as M_D_K said, it just means a little more saving.

I'm going to pick mine up in early June from NY (about $500 cheaper than buying locally) and I can only hope they get cheaper by then, to compete with all the used 5Dc/5D2s that will be flooding the market.

 

I think the upgrade is nice. I am curious to handle the camera and see how quick it is. The focus on the 5DII is quicker than the 5D, and that goes for any of the series. The later the generation the quicker they are. I think this would be a great full frame and video camera.

To me, though, the upgrades aren't nearly as impressive as the upgrades to the 1D series with the 1D-X.

Then again, I am really stubborn and prefer the 1DIII and my 1DII over most anything.

 

As much as I agree with you that people invested in one format aren't going to go flocking in droves to the Canon side of the field, I'm curious as to who all these "serious video makers" are. From my experience, all kinds of different film makers (or video makers, or whatever) use all kinds of different glass.

Bah, it seems I'm on a role for double-posting.

Edit:
It's a nice camera, sure. I'll probably continue to use my 40D until it breaks, then I'll re-evaluate the field and make a determination then.

I'm curious about the comments I read about the autofocus module. Do people really have a hard time using autofocus on any camera body? Any time a new camera is released, without fail I read numerous comments about how the camera's autofocus is either: A) Awesome because you can focus in vertical orientation in the snow at f/whatever; or B) Poor because you only get 42 autofocus points, and 8 of them don't work on weekends.

Honestly, I've never really had a hard time getting my camera to focus. Am I just lucky, or have others actually run into scenarios when they needed an extra 10 focus points in vertical orientation?

 

cleaning up my double-post

 

I'd hazard a guess that most pro-am photographers won't notice a difference. I shoot high-action photography, so the difference is clear. I remember when I got my 40D from a 30D I thought the focus was an amazing upgrade. That was two years ago. When I got my 1D's, I couldn't believe how much faster the focus is. I almost can't stand using the 40D for high speed photography.

It really depends on what you shoot. If you shoot portraits or stills, you wont notice. When you're shooting racecars travelling at 65 to 200+ mph, you go insane without high speed AF. The more AF points the better, and quicker the focus will be for high speed action shots. At 8.3-10FPS, I don't have time to wait for the camera to pick a focus point and then focus. Which is why I shoot primarily with L lenses as well for high speed shots.

The computers in the camera's become faster and faster which allow for faster and faster AF. It's not that other people are having problems, or that you have a special camera, its that you probably don't need super fast AF, so you don't notice it.