Guess what Santa is bringing to the Jones household this year?
Guess what Santa is bringing to the Jones household this year?
Yawn. It's not even a 50D with 21 megapixels. It's a 5D with 21 megapixels and to be honest my 5D's with 13 are pretty much good enough, especially as stopping down with that many megapixels will kill most of the advantage anyway. Exactly the same AF system, weather sealing (yeah right) from the 40D, no silent mode, etc. Can't see why it's worth bothering unless you shoot no further stopped down than f8 in a studio. My two very battered 5D's will live on.
Af system with 9 points, all cross type now.
It has silent mode
It has Live view with AF
It has wireless transmitter.
About double resolution. Sraw1 for 10 mp and Sraw2 for 5 mp.
According to Canon, it will better 1Ds3 in picture quality.
Plus a lot more other stuff I don't really care.
Price: $ 600 usd less than original
Match it with a Zeiss 21 Distagon
Amazing!!!! Awsome!!! Heavenly!!!
ok this was one of the four models that i never expected to see marketing pick to release... and they only did that last night.. interesting as this will kill every 1dsmk3 sale from now on and totally piss off the entire pro market who brought into the way over expensive 1dsmk3 now...
now they just have to make it before xmas lol - and you can thank sony a900 for this also btw.. canon was pushed into a corner big time eh?
I think we have to credit Sony for shaking up the DSL market, interesting when the market dominant is compelled to follow rather than lead. The next 12 months will be quite interesting WRT new releases from all manufacturers.
Thank God I sold my 1dsMk3 when I did, if I saw these specs while still owning it, I would be PISSED! I sold all of my Canon gear because of these types of stunts they pull with their marketing.
So did I Andrew! I however am waiting a few more hours to see if the new 5D specs and pricing really are all that... If so, I'll probably own it as soon as it's available; 21 MP, ISO 25,600 and $2600 US is pretty darn compelling (), but 4 fps is not quite as fast as I want.
But yeah, I don't like them much as a company either,
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
Not entirely impressed. Like to see some images.
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
Don't look for the canon samples then, usual depressingly bad photography.
A lot of MP for the $$$ and likely sweet IQ at lower ISOs, but no gapless micro-lenses, same old SI-screen VF, I understand same 5D mirror box (issues with alt lens - not that Canon SHOULD care), no real weather sealing, tweak to fps (not a biggie for me anyway), same 5D body, AF sys (according to RG and Chuck W) is the same. Video - who cares? New LCD - but old one was getting to be a laughing stock anyway.
Bitching aside, it's a nice camera for the $$$ and while the fan-boys will go nuts, it will fill the needs of many real photogs (vs gear nuts). That said, it would have been nice to see Canon change it's stripes a bit and offer say 16 or so fatter pixels, ditch the video and up the snack-bracket of the WS, VF tech, etc. Make the 5DII to the 1Ds3, even with fewer MP, what the D700 is to the D3.
I would not want to be a 1Ds3 (studio) shooter this a.m. (not that you couldn't have seen it coming). Their $8000 body HAD dropped to $6500 or less used and can now be matched (lot of IQ assumptions here) IN THE STUDIO (where WS and uber-AF are less of a concern) for a sub $3000 body. Nice. Very nice.
As for ISO 25,600 - w/o gapless lens tech and 21MP I'll reserve judgement until I see tests beyond the typical "who did these and why..?" sample shots Canon sticks up. My hopes aren't high.
Let the various B&S forum 5D Mk1 tsunamis begin.....
Last edited by robmac; 17th September 2008 at 04:09.
If for the type of shooting you do any of the following are completely imperative then the 1ds series is still your best bet:
2 card ports for instant backup.
Full weather sealing.
Pro AF..I don't know much about differences in AF, speed, etc
So I do believe a market certainly still exists for both.
Whatever the price difference, if these are to be used proffessionally where you just have to and rely upon any of the above then the 1dsmkIII still is the camera to use.
Apparently NO (RG site). Does have Digic IV processor. From RG's site it sounds that they gave the 1Ds3's sensor a buff and polish and tweaked the amplification electronics instead of gapless tech:
"Sensor With a size of 24 x 36mm, 21.03 million image pixels and a pixel pitch of 6.4µm square, the 5D Mark II's CMOS sensor offers the identical pixel count in a sensor that's identical in size to the full-frame EOS-1Ds Mark III.
(My EDIT: IMPORTANT PART) The 5D Mark II's sensor also features the same light-gathering area within each pixel (called the fill ratio) and same microlens coverage over each pixel as the company's current flagship.
To achieve what Canon is saying will be the highest image quality and lowest noise ever to emerge from a Canon EOS digital SLR, they introduced several refinements: the array of red, green and blue coloured filters over the sensor have been made more transmissive, which effectively bumps up the sensor's light sensitivity, plus they tweaked the way the sensor's signal (the light it has gathered during the exposure) is amplified and then read out."
Well I'm impressed!
When the 5D was released, they made sure it had less resolution and equal nominal ISO to the 1Ds II, which preceded it by a full year. Now the 5D II comes predictably 1 year after the 1Ds III, matches that camera on resolution and ups the ante on ISO.
Moisture/dust seals are improved from the 5D, all AF points are now cross type, and many of us don't need better weather resistance or AF than that. Then they improved the viewfinder coverage to 98%, threw in 1080P movie mode and made it $300 less than the least expensive full frame competitors.
The specified shutter lag and VF blackout time are a bit disappointing, but overall I think Canon's done quite well here.
Samples from Canon Korea:
ISO 100 - http://www.canon-ci.co.kr/pds/produc...e/IMG_1179.JPG
ISO 6400 - http://www.canon-ci.co.kr/pds/produc...e/IMG_0932.JPG
The 6400 sample looks nasty - also some banding? (white streaks) but it just could be how it's presenting on my monitor. I also nominate it for the worst sample photo of the decade.
Last edited by robmac; 17th September 2008 at 06:09.
The gaps on this sensor ARE reduced from the 5D, but not true "gapless" as on the 50D.
Sony A99, RX1, RX100
There's a bunch of ISO 100 samples on the Canon Korea website, but the only non- ISO 100 image there is the ISO 6400 shot I linked. They don't mention whether the shot was taken with HTP or Auto Lighting Optimizer (the first would increase shadow noise/banding, and the second might as well).
I give them some props for posting a challenging scene with lots of shadows (EXIF: 15mm, 1/83 sec, F4, ISO 6400). It would have been easy enough for them to post a shot taken in better light.
After processing from RAW and downsizing to 12MP (or simply shooting 10MP SRAW). it would of course look much better.
The 50D (which also uses the Digic IV) does 15.1MP at 6.3 fps. That's 95.13 MP/sec. The Nikon D700 does 60.5 MP/sec without the grip (12.1 x 5fps) or 96.8 MP/sec with the grip (12.1 x 8).
By comparison, the 5DII only does 82.3 MP/sec (21.1 x 3.9), using the same processor as that on the 50D. I really wish Canon had been able to squeeze another 1.5 - 2.0 fps out of the 5DII, so it could also serve as a sports camera.
The way it is, I'll probably also have to own a 1D series (probably the 1D2) for sports work, and the more complete weather-proofing.
The 5DII will serve well as a landscape shooting, and portrait camera, for those of us who can't afford a MFDB
Sony A99, RX1, RX100
Well it is now clear why Canon waited so long to announce the 5D replacement. They wanted to sell as many of the 1DsMkIII prior to the announcement and given the features of the new 5D MkII sales would really have slumped. (Much like what I believe happened with the D3 once the D700 was announced)
The gaps would be reduced simply due to the higher MP (vs 5D). That said, gapless or not, it will make a nice (large) portrait or landscape body.
In short, if you like(d) the 5D and found it did the job, the 5DII gives you a nice higher MP upgrade at minimal (absolute) cost vs the 1Ds3, though I suspect there will be (as one would expect) a high-ISO hit (vs the Mk1).
Puts it all into perspective, we wait 3 years for a marketing driven half baked replacement.
Keep in mind, it's been 3 years since the release of the origianl 5D. Canon has advanced their circuitry, micro-lenses, and sensor technologies, significantly in that time.
Sony A99, RX1, RX100
We'll have to see Mike, but just call me skeptical.
My understanding as well.
There are some ISO 500-25,600 JPEGs here - http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news...Sample!!!.html
It's a big download because of a video file, but someone has mirrored the image files only for download here.
I don't think the ISO 500 files look very good, but then again they're just in-camera JPEGs with unclear camera settings.
Canon lose the video and give us 7 or 9 auto EV bracketing for HDR landscape work.
This all seems a bit amusing, and puzzling at the same time. For the past several years folks were still lusting after more mega pixels, but started to enjoy the merits of what the 5D had to offer with respect to image quality. Does not seem like much may have been lost in the update, but quite a bit was added to the older version, and at a much, much more attractive price.
I am not a fan boy or anything of the sort, but the specs on this updated version do not look all that bad. Let's be honest folks, even if they had gone to gapless pixels, more cross AF points, higher frame rates, and all those things folks are bemoaning, I do think that there would still be a rather large group of "glass half empty" folks complaining about what was missing. Could Canon have tweaked more things? Probably. But what they have is a fairly significant improvement in some areas, and probably enough to compete quite nicely with anything else out there now.
I also tend to think (maybe wishful) that it is not completely over yet. I would not be surprised to hear about yet another Canon DSLR before the end of the year. They will have to address the "pro level" offering, as the 5DMkII can now eclipse their flagship model for some things. Do not know anything, but would not be surprised to see the 50D sensor tech installed into a 1DsMkIV at 40MP or more, decent high ISO, rest of the stuff at least the same or better than now, and possibly at a lower price point also. The gap between the 5DMkII offering and the 1DsMkIII is closer on some things, but startling on the price point, so Canon may be pressuring themselves into something really beyond most folk's imagination, or offering an upgraded model 1-series at a much more reasonable price.
For a very large group of buyers, the new 5DMkII is going to be very attractive, hit enough marks, and bring folks back around to reconsidering Canon. If folks are complaining about marketing driving things over technology, they are missing the point of business, even for giants like Canon. Were Canon to put all of the best tech they have into a model to "blow the competition away", (as they did early on), what do they gain if they also have to charge $8000 or more for that model? This 5DMkII has enough of everything for the largest mid-upper end buyers, including some serious HD video.
I just do not quite get what all the "DPR-like" or "FM-like" bitching and moaning is about this camera. I blows the socks off of its predecessor. It is significantly cheaper. It meets or exceeds almost everything else on the market right now, and there is still the possibility for an even better "flagship" model. If the 5DMkII does not get you there, wait for the next 1-series and pay that price, or go to MF and pay an even bigger price.
I think we'll see the new 1D's at PMA '09 in March.
Do we all agree that 5D files are among the best 35mm ones out there even up to ISO 1600?
If so, then the 5D Mark II will be even better at a lower price. Ignore the technology and jargon. Does it make really good files? I think so. Let's see when the tests come in, but I suspect they will be very tasty.
Now let's all get back to shooting where we should spend most of our time
Guys, I've got to come down with LJ on this one, but I do hear what you are saying. There aren't even decent test frames posted yet on this camera, and not a single actual shooting experience reported, and already it has been judged to be deficient by many. I'd caution all of you to be skeptical of anything you read off of a spec sheet, and let the proof of the pudding reside solely in the actual physical shooting & examination of the resultant files. Canon aren't dumb all of the time, there is a substantial improvement in almost every area in this present offering over the camera it replaces. Enough to warrant a close examination myself, which is something that no other Canon of recent vintage has tempted me to do.
And you know the thing that they did change that gives me interest? The creative possibilities of using that 1080p video stream, and intermixing high quality stills into the flow. Go price a full frame CMOS sensor HD video camera, and get an eye full if you think this camera is expensive. I have. Many thousands of dollars more. Few of us have already seen a glimpse of the future, and my brothers, it is all about the convergence of still and video. Seen any of the new LED billboards yet? You will. I'd guess within two years, the old paper & plaster "signs" will all be gone here in the USA. Replaced with moving images, both rotating stills and actual video capture. What this means for professional photographers astute enough to grasp the implications, a huge windfall of new work with very few presently able to do it. The signs are all there, and I for one, am all over it. Save for one thing.... the cost of the camera. The only other full 35mm frame HD 1080p capture device I have found is the RED. And it is cheap at only $18,000 out the door. Without a stinking lens! Those can run more than the body, much more in fact. At $2,700, this camera is an absolute steal, provided of course that the actual image quality is up to the claims on the spec sheet. Let us also not forget what kind of magic mounting the now relatively inexpensive Leica R glass collection onto the front of a 1080p video capture device could reveal.
But then, all of you "glass half empty" types that have yet to even drink the actual water should sit right there in your easy chairs in front of your computer, while the rest of us get the chance to jump on this train fast, before it leaves the station. Just my opinion, and I certainly do respect your right to have a different one. But I am certainly going to be one of the first in line to test this new Canon, and if it is anywhere near as good as the specs say it should be, I will be leaving the store with it in hand, and thanking Canon greatly for saving me so many thousands of hard earned dollars!
Last edited by Chuck Jones; 17th September 2008 at 11:33.
We don't need to hold it in our hands to know that the AF is exactly the same as that in the 5D's we've been shooting for 3 years. A single useable AF sensor slow at focusing lenses slower than f4. No one is dissing the IQ, it's the choice of a very diffraction limited uber megapixel sensor rather than features and IQ ala Nikon.
I think it boils down to what you need, if you need 21 megapixels at that price then eat your heart out. If you need 12 minute video clips, great. There is still nothing to compare to the D700 in the canon lineup and that does bother a whole heck of a lot of photographers who need a certain level of IQ with pro features but don't want to have to unecessarily pay 1 series money for it and are mostly locked into the system because of lens and accessory investments.
I don't need more than 13 megapixels most of the time and very rarely at non diffraction limited f-stops, if they had put the 50D's AF system in then together with the enviromental sealing and the occasional need for megapixels I would have been pushed off the edge and upgraded my 5D's. With the same AF system, I'm sticking with what I've got, I've coped with it for the past 3 years I'll continue to cope without having to spend a fortune to upgrade for marginal and unjustifiable (from a business POV) benefits.
The camera is only better than its competition if you consider the megapixel count to be the deciding factor. Given that we had hoped the megapixel war to be over and the concentration to be of features - it's only better in one feature (worse in every other) and that far from being the most important one anymore. In the UK it is being released at exactly the same price as the original 5D was and $1200 more than the D700, $600 more than the Sony even.
Last edited by Ben Rubinstein; 17th September 2008 at 11:54.
Until we see a camera we really do not know what we are talking about. The autofocus with a new processing engine changes everything digic 1v . Me I own two 1d mk 111 and a 1ds mk111 which I use for concerts and landscapes and magazine work as well as my leica m8 . I am not seriousily bummed because I know the 1ds is a faster working camera then the 5d shutter lag and frames per second are important to me. But I do want a light weight canon again . 50 d or 5d we will see. David
Ben - I keep seeing you refer to the 21MP sensor in the 5DII as "diffraction limited". I'm not sure how or why you are coming to that conclusion.
Since diffraction is an effect of the lens / aperture, and not the sensor, I assume that you are referring to the notion that you can't capture more detail at higher pixels, so the extra pixels are wasted. Is that true?
If that's your claim, then I strongly disagree. I owned and shot the 1DsIII for many months, and with the right glass, it certainly outresolves the 16MP 1DsII and the 13MP 5D. Based on your theory (if I understand you correctly), the 5DII and 1DsIII would be equally impacted by diffraction. Simply put, diffraction is simply not a significant issue at 21MP.
From the studies I've read, and the research available online, most of those "in the know" believe that diffraction won't become a relevant issue until around 40+MP on a full-frame sensor, again depending on the lens/aperture used.
Sony A99, RX1, RX100
Mike, have a read:
The idea is that the more pixels you squeeze into a smaller space the faster diffraction becomes a problem when stopping down. My 5D isn't diffraction limited at f11, the 1Ds mkIII is.
Assuming it lives up to spec and there are no 'gotchas' anywhere, the camera offers a lot of iQ for the $$ - as it should as the costs/MP for the electronics drop year/year. Same pricing model as computers - more bang for relatively speaking the same $$$ with each product cycle.
That said, everyone has different needs/wants. I'll sacrifice some MP for a clean VF and more D700-D300 like body/sealing. Assuming the 5DII will have the same variable mfg tolerances as the 5D did (they have to cut costs somewhere), I'd give up some MP for the knowledge that I don't have to juggle shims everytime I change focus screens, etc. YMMV.
On the some of us are 1/2 empty vs 1/2 full; if the 'wait until we see images' request were to be adhered to by those who think some of us are 1/2 empty, we should ALL be saying NOTHING praising or critiquing the body until the right tests are done. However, that is in an ideal world ;>. Our responses are based on what we see on paper so far - they may change (one way or the other) as things move fwd in real world tests.
For me, it's a mixed bag. For others, obviously not. Horses for Courses. I never buy new anyway, so I'm looking fwd to seeing some 'early adopter' experiences.
Ben - I guess if you shoot mainly at f11 or higher, it could be a concern. In that case, you're probably shooting landscapes, architecture, or critical macro work. In any of those cases, I would think that the extra megapixels would far outweigh the situations where diffraction limitations would come in to play.
Sony A99, RX1, RX100
Rightly or not, I will take that barb since I did mention the "half empty" in my comments. However, I made those comments precisely because so many folks seem to be trashing a camera from which none of us have seen any real images yet. So, I agree with you, in part, that those that are unhappy or pessimistic about Canon's new offering are entitled to their opinions and thoughts, they should wait to see the images before tossing the baby with the bathwater on this camera. It could be a dud, but it could also amaze some folks, just as the 5D did when it was introduced. I guess I just do not understand what it is that people are wanting or expecting from some of these tools. Most already provide more than the majority of users will ever be able to realize. And for that small group of much more discerning folks with special needs, there are or will be other tools. None of any of these cameras can do it all to everyone's needs. Canon, and Nikon, have been pretty good at trying to create offerings that they think will appeal to a very large customer base they target, and it does seem to work. I just think it is great to see how rapidly things keep advancing, and how some of these tools are really incredible. Sure, lots more to come, and we keep hoping and wishing, which is fine, but a lot of what is out there now exceeds the capabilities of an awful lot of users already.
P.S. For the record....a fair amount of my stuff gets printed pretty big from crops of my lowly 8MP 1DMkII camera, and nobody seems to complain about that. The also now defunct 1DsMkII produces even more stunning stuff for printing. I never bought into the 5D because I did not see it doing anything for my shooting needs. This new camera may not either, but I am pretty sure it will do a lot more for an awful lot of folks unless its images totally suck. So, we should wait to see the images, as you comment, but there appears to be a lot to like about this offering.
Last edited by LJL; 17th September 2008 at 14:37.
LJ - no barb intended. Please don't think otherwise.
As long as we ALL keep things in perspective and realize that everyone's wants/needs/ perceptions are different, such discussions stay fun and a intellectually stimulating.
I agree - the pace of advancement is startling - and I think skewing our perspectives.
I think Jono S said it well in a post some threads ago (I'll summize) - the camera doesn't matter, the the subject captured and the story/emotions imparted is ALL that matters..
The best pictures in history were captured with gear that some of us now would relegate to the back of our closets...
5DII skin tones look somewhat placticy so far. Any comment?
I was not offended at all. As I had commented, it is amusing to watch the ebb and flow of emotions and comments over something that was just announced and almost nobody has used. To see how a camera's capability and performance were being judged by a press release (complete with questionable accuracies, confusing wording, and flat out mis-reading by some), when there was nothing else to go on.
Many of us may have lived through the M8 release....I have, and despite all the glitches, problems, screw-ups, etc., that 10MP camera with NO AF, NO 98% viewfinder, low ISO capabilities, etc., etc., still is capable of capturing images of quality that are hard to match. It is so far from perfect that it is worth laughing about, but it does things that few others can, despite all its flaws and warts. The present 5D has its own things, some significantly improved with the 5DMkII....at least in spec, others maybe not so much. But I would wager that it too will be able to do an outstanding job in the hands of somebody that can use it for what they shoot.
Let's see some good images to see just how good or not this thing is