Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Canon 5D MK III
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:08 am    Post subject: Canon 5D MK III Reply with quote

Canon has finally announced the 5D Mk III. The new 22.3 Mpixels camera is its answer to Nikon D800. Maybe and maybe not. The good news is it is using some of the 1Dx technology.

Some interesting facts:
Sensor: 22.3 mp Fullframe (36.0mm x 24.0mm) CMOS
ISO: 100-25,600
Processor: Digic 5+
Focusing point: 61 point
Drive: 6fps
Storage: CF, SD
Display: 1.04 million. 3.2 inch LCD
Video: Full HD with manual control
Shutter life: 150,000
Price: $3499 (or €3299) with 24-105mm lens: $4299


How does it compared to the other:
Here is an interesting table: http://gizmodo.com/5889783/the-canon-5d-mark-iii-comparison-how-it-stacks-up-to-other-cameras

Good news for many here is Canon is keeping 5D Mk II alive and selling it cheaper.

More news:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/02/Canon-5D-Mark-III
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Features


Last edited by my_photography on Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:35 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

looking at http://www.dpreview.com/previews/CanonEOS5DMarkIII/images/sensor.jpg it seems that it won't officially support different focusing screens Sad (no release thingy)

compare to the 5d2:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Images/mount01.jpg


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

spoilerhead wrote:
looking at http://www.dpreview.com/previews/CanonEOS5DMarkIII/images/sensor.jpg it seems that it won't officially support different focusing screens Sad (no release thingy)

compare to the 5d2:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Images/mount01.jpg



You might be right. I just check the specs from Canon site:

For 5D MKII Focusing Screens it writes:
"Focusing Screen Interchangeable (Eg-D: Grid lines, Eg-S [point of Focus], Eg-A standard focusing screen provided" (http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_ii#Specifications)

but for 5D MKIII focusing screen it writes "Focusing Screen Fixed (http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Specifications)

Canon, what have you done? Shocked Evil or Very Mad


Last edited by my_photography on Fri Mar 02, 2012 1:03 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Confirmation Sad

http://blog.jeffascough.com/photographers/2012/03/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review.html

"The viewfinder is a world away from the 5D Mark II. Now we have 100% coverage which does make a huge difference. It is glorious to use, with a lovely bright image and even with spectacles I found it easy to see all the edges of the frame. The eye relief is just about right. The AF points are projected onto the focusing screen like the 7D and 1DX but it does mean that you can’t change focusing screens like the earlier models."


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not impressed by this announcement.
Adding the focusing screen issue, which is very painful for MF lenses lovers like us, I am rather disappointed.

I am glad I have bought a NEX-5N, which can also shoot 1080p video at 50 fps. Also the AF works properly during video.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Same here, unimpressed so far. If the sensor performs significantly better at ISO 100, it might be more interesting.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder if it will still have the mirror problem of the mk1 and mk2. Maybe Canon finally redesigned the mirror box for the 5d3?


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spoilerhead wrote:
I wonder if it will still have the mirror problem of the mk1 and mk2. Maybe Canon finally redesigned the mirror box for the 5d3?


Well Canon haven't changed the register distance, and the mirror is unlikely to be any smaller, so I imagine the problems would remain I'm afraid.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ManualFocus-G wrote:

Well Canon haven't changed the register distance, and the mirror is unlikely to be any smaller, so I imagine the problems would remain I'm afraid.


Well, afaik the 1ds3 didn't have as many problems with lenses as the 5d2, neither does my good old EOS3, so there is something that can be done


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spoilerhead wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:

Well Canon haven't changed the register distance, and the mirror is unlikely to be any smaller, so I imagine the problems would remain I'm afraid.


Well, afaik the 1ds3 didn't have as many problems with lenses as the 5d2, neither does my good old EOS3, so there is something that can be done


Sorry, I thought that had been dis-proved, but a quick Google reveals otherwise Smile Maybe there is hope then! But still no focus screen for fast lenses Sad


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

well, when its available someone will mount some good old sweeties on it Smile

about focusing screens: i guess katzeye will get some customers, they got screens for the 7d, too (with a similar lcd overlay as the 5d3)


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ManualFocus-G wrote:

Well Canon haven't changed the register distance, and the mirror is unlikely to be any smaller, so I imagine the problems would remain I'm afraid.


Sony's A900 (also 100% viewfinder) has a mirror hinged differently* than usual so that it doesn't swing forward as much, so theoretically it could possibly be solved but Canon doesn't really have any reason to go to the extra trouble and expense as it's not their lenses that are problematic.

* Mirror swing animation on this page, search for “mirror lifts”.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ManualFocus-G wrote:
spoilerhead wrote:
I wonder if it will still have the mirror problem of the mk1 and mk2. Maybe Canon finally redesigned the mirror box for the 5d3?

Well Canon haven't changed the register distance, and the mirror is unlikely to be any smaller, so I imagine the problems would remain I'm afraid.

From http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-11675-12364

"The mirror mechanism has been reworked to accommodate the camera's faster frame rate. The main difference is better stability - less bounce - when the mechanism is in the down position."

This might turn out to be either good or bad for alt lenses.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

14-bit A/D Conversion

Isnt that the same as the mkII?


PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

all canons in the last years (i think only with the 1000d as exception) had 14bit A/D converters


PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't understand how Canon dares to use the photos below as "samples". Even my Pentax K-5 is much better on a pixel level. This is just... trash, sorry. With RAW's the story could and should be different, but why show those fullsize samples if the quality is bad?

Canon really should stop using heavy noise reduction in its JPEG's. It's a shame, really.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/01_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/02_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/03_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/04_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/05_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/06_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/07_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/08_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/09_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/10_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/11_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/12_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/13_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/14_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/15_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/16_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/17_cinc_big.jpg

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/18_cinc_big.jpg


PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed. Looks like the smeared pixels from a P&S. The landscape shots are especially bad.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AhamB wrote:
Agreed. Looks like the smeared pixels from a P&S. The landscape shots are especially bad.

Regarding the landscapes, the 17-40mm is clearly not up to the job.
I sold it a few years ago, when it disappointed me on the original 12MP 5D...


PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I bought the 5D MkII, I had a lenses' dilemna. Which one should I choose ?
The 17-40 and 24-105 were the most adviced, but always some caracteristics made me hesitate. At these prices, I found the max aperture to high with F4, then distorsion was an issue.
Everybody told me to look at the 24-70 f:2.8. What I saw and felt was good but the cost was so high that I prefered to buy the Tamron SP 28-75mm f:2.8. I didn't regret my choice because it is an excellent price quality ratio.

But, I still wonder what would be the best choice in Canon lenses for the Canon 5D MkII...
Maybe the 16-35 f:2.8 ?


PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Care to say why the 17-40mm is bad/good. I'm thinking about getting one for my crop sensor body and it seems to be in a reasonable price range for me. I don't mind f4 and 16-35mm f2.8costs twice as much :/


PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm continually amazed at the poor quality image samples both Nikon and Canon have been using recently, for even their flagship models Shocked Apparently the 5D II samples were awful as well Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ManualFocus-G wrote:
I'm continually amazed at the poor quality image samples both Nikon and Canon have been using recently, for even their flagship models Shocked Apparently the 5D II samples were awful as well Laughing


They should hire someone from this forum to shoot for them. Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

my_photography wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I'm continually amazed at the poor quality image samples both Nikon and Canon have been using recently, for even their flagship models Shocked Apparently the 5D II samples were awful as well Laughing


They should hire someone from this forum to shoot for them. Laughing

Why not?
However, Peter's concern was about image quality. Not about composition or aesthetics.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lindman wrote:
Care to say why the 17-40mm is bad/good. I'm thinking about getting one for my crop sensor body and it seems to be in a reasonable price range for me. I don't mind f4 and 16-35mm f2.8costs twice as much :/

The 17-40 has very bad corners.
However, the 16-35, esp. the first version, does not do much better.
Why do you think we ended up with MF Zeiss lenses?
The best all-around Canon lens is, by far, the 24-70. But is BIG.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my_photography wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I'm continually amazed at the poor quality image samples both Nikon and Canon have been using recently, for even their flagship models Shocked Apparently the 5D II samples were awful as well Laughing


They should hire someone from this forum to shoot for them. Laughing


and mount proper Contax Carl Zeiss lenses on them. Wink

tf