Equipment Top "amateur" Canon Camera?

there will be soon though from both Nikon & Sony & Canon know it which is why they are shifting their stock of 5Ds at (relatively) low prices - they don't want to get left with stock.
I'm sure that they have a replacement but I doubt that it will be $1800.

 

And with the new competition (which will compete more so with the 1DsIII given specs and price points) comes the 5D replacement. They are not shifting stock solely because of the arrival of competition, rather more so because of the fall arrival of a 5D replacement...which if projected correctly should fall somewhere in the 3-3.5K mark, although its anyones guess.

This is an interesting thread on the topic.

 

All the rumours say that the Sony FF is going to come in at 5D Mk II level then & there are rumours of Nikon bringing out 2 FFs - 1 a full Pro body & 1 in a D300 type body probably to similarly go against the 5D/5D Mk II although it could be 1 optimised for sports etc. & 1 optimised for studio work.

 

The rumor is the same for the 5D replacement...2 camera's...1 higher spec'd, 1 lower...Truth is until this is verified it is only that, a rumor. Point is at the moment the 5D has no competition.

 

Probably semantics but I wouldn't say that it has no competition (several cheaper bodies can match or better it's resolution, AF speed etc.) but that it has it's own niche.
Rumour is that the Sony is due out before Photokina though, possibly even next month.

 

Match or Better its resolution? Are you mad!? Your speaking of 5 year old technology that stands up to Nikon's D3...and for a fraction of the price. I am not stating the 5D is a better camera per se (nor do I claim it is), but if we're speaking of just IQ you've gotta laugh. There is no FF camera priced at $1800 that can stand up to the 5D. Period. To go ahead and make a statement that, for example, the D300 and the D3 directly compete with the 5D is just...well idiotic. It has absolutely no competition ATM.

 

I'm not & there is more to IQ than just resolution but yes, there are APS-C cameras that can match or better the 5D in resolution (of course assuming that the lens are capable of providing the necessary image - & we are seeing many lenses being shown up by new sensors) whilst offering improvements in other areas (AF, DR, fps etc. etc.).
There is no perfect "does it all" body which is why even at professional level there are body choices from the same manufacturer & the 5D has been (still is) a great body but imo it's no longer playing on it's own on an empty field. Canon obviously believe that too or they wouldn't be chopping the price & prepping a replacement if they didn't have to.
So as I said, imo it has it's own niche where it may offer the best balance of features/price but I don't agree that it has no competition per se, I'm sure that e.g. the D300 will have swayed a no. of people who might have bought a 5D.

 

Pound for pound, the 5D is the sharpest DSLR under $6000 available today. It's a phenomenal camera, and given that's it's built on 2-3 year old technology (I don't believe it's 5 years old), that's amazing. The Nikon D3 is not nearly as sharp, and all of the APS-C and APS-H cameras cannot touch it for sharpness. Only the 1DsIII seems to beat it in tests.

What I find silly is that we're all arguing over an arbitrary point (me included!). Some of us value sharpness/IQ over FPS or AF speed or durability or certain features, or vice versa. The point is, that every modern DSLR has some killer feature that makes it invaluable and the "best" camera for certain people. The 1Ds is a full-frame ultra-resolution camera that approaches medium-format levels (read reviews, don't flame me for that). The 1D is a super-fast news/sports camera, with a set of great long glass to back it up. The D3 is a rugged, fast, full-featured camera with tons of innovations. The D300 is one of the best APS-C cameras available, with almost all of the features of the D3. The 5D has older components, but the image sensor and overall output quality is still unmatched today. It's all a matter of application.

Back on topic, however, I would say that the 450D (and related) is overall an amateur camera, and the 40D (and related) is overall a high-end amateur camera, or possibly a backup professional's body. The 5D is a low-end professional/high-end amateur body, and the 1D and 1Ds are very high end. Resolved?

 

correct, if you offered me the choice of a free D300 or a free 5D I would go for a D300 for my (& no, I'm not a Nikon user) needs but if I was primarily a landscape/wedding photographer etc. I would probably take the 5D.
If you are printing at normal sizes you aren't going to see any minimal difference anyway.

 

Exactly! I printed a Canon SD800IS photo taken at ISO 80 on 13x19" paper - with my 5x loupe and a backlit table, it looks terrible! If I stand more than 1-2 feet away, it's no problem. Mind you, this is a 1/2.5" sensor, less than pinky-toenail sized (especially mine, which I just cracked off ).

But although this discussion is silly, it's so much fun. Right?

 

Touché, Noah...I always do that, most likely because of the year it was conceived (2005). At this point is almost second nature.

Rather than carrying on an otherwise pointless argument, perhaps these links will convince some of the resolution the 5D generates.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/652899
http://www.photoprotips.com/20071024/5d-vs-h3dii/
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/sharpness-1.htm

3* year old technology at its best.

 

being a poor bloke, amateur for me means like a canon s3/s5 IS or the G series (G5,7 and 9). they are pretty good cameras for their price, very versatile but image quality compared to even a 350d is comparable to night and day for me. the 7d is confirmed to come out soon enough - did you guys hear about that?

 

nothing is confirmed

 

x2...it will get here nonetheless, at least a 5D successor will.

 

Would depend a lot on usage . . . as a golf photographer I think a semi-waterproof body would be sensible thus the 1 series . . . as a indoor product photographer shooting for a small run specialist magazine even the lowest entry point canon slr could be classed as professional . . . . as in both cases the camera would give reliable and professional results for the intended purpose and expected conditions (assuming used correctly).

 

Why would a guy need a weather sealed camera to shoot nothing but gold? or am I missing something?

 

you're not the only one missing something. Then again, I hesitate to ask for an explanation as the multiple other threads that 3dHeli has added to today seem to have some somewhat low sensibility. Either he/she's having a really off day, or there's something odd going on here...

 

Perhaps he shoots in gold mines? Either that, or by 'gold' he meant sports...

 

I took it to mean panning for gold, which is the only thing I could think of involving moisture. Or maybe it's "I'm so rich I'll buy a 1-series body to take pictures of all my gold. It's great that they're weatherproof as I intend to flush it down my platinum toilet." ?

 

So I'm not the only one that noticed it, whew. I was worried that there was something funny in the wine I had with dinner.