5D MKIII specs

deltoidjohn said:
Really good photographers don't need to review the shots to know when they've got a great photograph - it is not as though they are just snapping away and then scrolling through to find the best ones. They know the moment they hit the shutter button that they have a keeper. The only reason they check the LCD is to admire their handywork, as opposed to checking focus or exposure to make sure it was correct..... they might shoot thousands of photos in a few hours, but they need to choose one to attach to a story within a few minutes of getting back to the office.
Click to expand...
How to answer this without sounding smart arse?... Humn... here goes.

This post is brilliant because finally, someone has started to analyze how we 'really' good shooters operate cognitively and reflexively. That's really important for everyone, not just pros. and obviously you've been a pro or are paying close attention.
The only problem i have with your assessment of our process is a couple of weird facts based on 35+ years of shooting.

Fact1 - Though it's impossible to be sure exactly where in a stills session the 'ONE' publishable image plus it's two near hits will occur; with the exception of SPORTS and FASHION, 90% of the keepers occur in the last 10% of images and amazingly, in-studio shoots my keeper is typically in the last 5 or 6 frames of the last 'look'. In sports the keepers will occur anywhere and that's a point that you make very well, BUT pros must review on the LCD the last 20-30 frames during a logical break, to make those 'ratings' for the editors back at the station to parse into the published images (how else can they make the 'flags'?). That's where this feature is a godsend, but make no mistake, I review ALL my shots during breaks to do a first cut (deleting outakes) otherwise I would slow down image transfer and editing later in any case. I am my photo editor so obviously, i have an advantage, though most pro shooters do not have that luxury.
Fact2 - when it comes to people shots other than sports, it's best not to do any deletions unless the shot is a obvious dud. With the advent of digital post, many elements of shots can be grafted between each other and closed eyes are not a problem at all :) No point in rating there.
Fact3 - It's easier and faster to winnow down via outakes than to rate keepers. I do all my rating after download to computer.
Fact4- As a designer/photographer, i can share that the editor/designer can really tear through images must faster to make the cuts than the stand-alone 'really' good shooter. It takes practice and most shooters don't design or edit for page layout.
 
traviswears said:
Wow, timecode and a headphone jack? Exciting. 720 at 60p? Exciting. A t2i can do that.

And they raise the price to 3500? Image-wise I'm sure it's going to beat the AF100. But for 3500, I'd rather have the built-in NDs, XLRs, headphone jack and 1080 60p of the AF100 with it's lower image quality. Not impressed by these specs at all unless the image is mind-blowing.

When will we see footage?
Click to expand...

Y'all gotta stop comparing pro-sumer dedicated VIDEO cameras with Hybrid DSLR's it's a lost cause.
 
Zephyrnoid said:
Y'all gotta stop comparing pro-sumer dedicated VIDEO cameras with Hybrid DSLR's it's a lost cause.
Click to expand...

And the features he loves in the AF100 (built in ND, XLRs, Headphone jack) mean exactly butkus to me as a narrative film shooter. i couldn't care less about those features. Would 60 fps 1080P be better than 60 fps 720P, well sure, but the rare occasion (music videos mostly) I need slo mo, 720 is good enough.
 
Kholi said:
You know what's not a surprise at all? HDMI out. For all the grief people give Barry Green, he's right most of the time. Canon's always late to the party and super conservative. Just another example of falling behind the curve. More I look at these videos, the more I see post sharpening, the less interested I am. Oh well.
Click to expand...

'Morning everyone! :-)

The HDMI output thing (lack thereof) is just sad. Lame really. It's 2012, not 2008.

Despite this, I'm very close to pushing the "pre-order" button.

I'm very happy about the 5DM3's full-frame goodness, apparently much-improved codecs and data-rates, audio controls & headphone jack, and LCD which is twice the res of the LCD on the GH2. Would like to see better-quality example video files before making a final decision, but some of what I've seen so far is promising.

I shoot mostly corporate-and-commercial video, and for the work I do the 5DM3 looks like a less-expensive (and understandably less-capable) alternative to the FS100 & AF100. The 5DM3's FF DOF will be especially practical for many of my shoots, which often occur in real locations, e.g. small rooms. For shoots that require a camera better than the 5DM3, I'm fortunate to live in a town where I can rent good gear.

I'd like to get confirmation about the cam's HDMI behavior. I've heard it's only 720p at best, and that the on-screen text displays can't be turned-off.

Although I'd prefer a nice quality "clean" 1080p HDMI output that can be externally recordable, failing that I'd prefer to at least have the option to press a "display" button to toggle all-but-the-red-dot on & off. Hopefully we can monitor a mostly-uncluttered signal out of the camera w/o text plastered around the periphery of the image! And, I'd much prefer 1080p for monitoring for critical focus than 720p or worse. Again, it's 2012. Nowadays, dirt-cheap home electronics are capable of outputting 1080p HDMI video.

Sure, I'd love to get clean, recordable, 1080p 4:2:2 HDMI out for $3,500 US, but I'm not surprised that our corporate overlords won't let us have it (yet). But I'll have to think a while about if I want to buy a cam at that price that can't even give me relatively uncluttered 1080p for monitoring. It's early days, so maybe the 5DM3 can in fact do the latter. We'll see.

Meanwhile, my finger remains hovering above the pre-order button .... :-)
 
Last edited:
For that matter, the 30 minute recording time is not that important either, unless you're going to redo "Rope". I just don't get why anyone wouldn't use a regular video camera if you're doing a live event or something else that requires the camera to roll for more than 12 minutes. It's just not practical at all to use a DSLR for that. OK, maybe for concerts, but there, the advantages of a DSLR are more for shooting wild and grabbing cool takes, not for shooting 30 minutes straight!
 
Peter J. DeCrescenzo said:
'Morning everyone! :-)

The HDMI output thing (lack thereof) is just sad. Lame really. It's 2012, not 2008.
Click to expand...

Yes

Despite this, I'm very close to pushing the "pre-order" button.
Click to expand...

No
Sure, I'd love to get clean, recordable, 1080p 4:2:2 HDMI out for $3,500 US, but I'm not surprised that our corporate overlords won't let us have it (yet).
Click to expand...

This mad me LOL. Nice. Corporate Overlords
 
Zephyrnoid said:
Y'all gotta stop comparing pro-sumer dedicated VIDEO cameras with Hybrid DSLR's it's a lost cause.
Click to expand...


What's your point? That the 5D Mk III isn't a VIDEO camera? How many people do you think bought a Mk II purely for video work? Hybrid DSLRs WILL be as fully functional as a pro-sumer video camera soon. Maybe not this iteration, or the next but soon. There's a large market clamoring for that. Just look at the success of all the accessories for the Mk II that do exactly that.

If you feel that comparing two cameras in the same price point that both shoot 1080 24p video is absurd simply because one of them is a DSLR, I don't know what to tell you.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
And the features he loves in the AF100 (built in ND, XLRs, Headphone jack) mean exactly butkus to me as a narrative film shooter. i couldn't care less about those features. Would 60 fps 1080P be better than 60 fps 720P, well sure, but the rare occasion (music videos mostly) I need slo mo, 720 is good enough.
Click to expand...

Great, go buy a Mk III then. I'm not saying it's not a great camera for anyone. I'm just a bit unimpressed myself. This camera could have come out a year ago with these features. There's nothing groundbreaking here.

And I'm not saying that I expected the Mk III to have NDs or XLR jacks. I'm saying that for the price, I prefer those features in another camera that also shoots video and I'll gladly trade off a bit of image quality for those features.
 
The more I read around the internet about peoples thoughts on this camera the more I'm struck on something. The $3500 price tag. I have shot with nearly every full frame canon digital since release. I paid $3200 for the brand new 5d. $3200 for the brand new 5Dmk2, both when they launched. Why are people crapping their pants about the $3500 price tag? The tsunami and the world market is the reason for the $300 launch increase. The 5dmk3 is NOT a prosumer camera, not anymore with the new focus system. The video looks far better than it's predecessor. Plus, it's built better.
Keep in mind that they are working on a DSLR body "C" series camera. Totally different divisions. Also, KEEP IN MIND that the 5dmk 1,2 and 3 are STILLS cameras first.
 
Also, in addition to what I posted a few minutes ago here #264 ...

Since $3,500 US is not chump change for me, I'll probably wait to see what's announced between now & NAB.

Chances are the 5DM3 may be the best bang-for-the-under-$4K-buck this year, but it seems prudent to wait a few weeks (for me) ...

As for the best-bang-for-the-under-$6K-buck maybe later this year: I'm look'n at you, "AF200"! ;-)
 
steventimothy said:
I just don't get why anyone wouldn't use a regular video camera if you're doing a live event or something else that requires the camera to roll for more than 12 minutes.
Click to expand...
DSLRs are all about versatility, ,multitasking and saving money on personnel.
Wedding- One shooter, covering video and grabbing stills at the SAME time. Some ceremonies run into overtime without breaks. 30 minutes is safe less is not
Documentary Interview- you politely ask the interviewee to keep their answers concise but forget to DEFINE concise , so that 5-10 minute answer turns into a 35 minute soliloquy. He's about to drop the 'bomb' on who dunnit BUT you have to stop him to let your sensor cool or change media and.... oh well, he's changed his mind about the answer.
I hope I don't have to paste this anymore :(
 
Though on paper the mkIII announcement is pretty underwhelming, we really won't know until we get some proper footage. A 5DmkII w/ virtually no aliasing/moire, reduced rolling shutter, slow-mo capability (albeit at 720), improved codec at a higher bitrate, and improved noise reduction and sensitivity could be pretty stellar. If DR is improved as well then Canon has addressed pretty much all of the major complaints about the mkII image.

If the Digic V+ is downscaling a full sensor readout then we should be seeing resolved detail on par with the GH2. If all of this is the case, then they have my order.
 
stefancolson said:
Though on paper the mkIII announcement is pretty underwhelming, we really won't know until we get some proper footage. A 5DmkII w/ virtually no aliasing/moire, reduced rolling shutter, slow-mo capability (albeit at 720), improved codec at a higher bitrate, and improved noise reduction and sensitivity could be pretty stellar. If DR is improved as well then Canon has addressed pretty much all of the major complaints about the mkII image.

If the Digic V+ is downscaling a full sensor readout then we should be seeing resolved detail on par with the GH2. If all of this is the case, then they have my order.
Click to expand...

i see it the same way as you, if the image quality issues are fixed, along with the other upgrades, i feel its a very worthwhile purchase. time will tell.
 
dustylense said:
The more I read around the internet about peoples thoughts on this camera the more I'm struck on something. The $3500 price tag. I have shot with nearly every full frame canon digital since release. I paid $3200 for the brand new 5d. $3200 for the brand new 5Dmk2, both when they launched. Why are people crapping their pants about the $3500 price tag? The tsunami and the world market is the reason for the $300 launch increase. The 5dmk3 is NOT a prosumer camera, not anymore with the new focus system. The video looks far better than it's predecessor. Plus, it's built better.
Keep in mind that they are working on a DSLR body "C" series camera. Totally different divisions. Also, KEEP IN MIND that the 5dmk 1,2 and 3 are STILLS cameras first.
Click to expand...

My initial feelings yesterday was just 'underwhelming' and price tag way too much. Too little bang for too much buck. Mainly since i got the MkII for 1.8K new. But with your perspective Dusty, i think i am leaning more towards understanding it at least and being more 'neutral'. The price will go down again after a couple years. Before 'pre-ordering', i think people should consider that there still might be the higher mp '5DX' or whatever. I can't see Canon just letting Nikon have that niche.
 
dustylense said:
KEEP IN MIND that the 5dmk 1,2 and 3 are STILLS cameras first.
Click to expand...
Without clean / uncompressed HDMI out, the 5dmkIII is a"STILLS cameras first"... as well ;)
I do have an answer to the first part. Why complain about $3,500 price tag. Bluntly, it's because most so-called customers for these hybrid DSLRs are really toy collectors not pro videographers. So by the time the 5dmkIII rolls around, those with fingers on the 'PRE-ORDER' button at BHPhotoVideo.com are pissing dollars because they'll have lost so much in the upgrade process. Here's what I see (dates and model numbers for illustration only) ...

$1000 paid in 2007 for HV20 . Sold for $400 to finance 5Dmk2. net Loss -$600. $3200 paid in 2010 for 5Dmk2. Sold for $2,000 to finance the 7D. Net loss, -$1,200. $3200 paid in 2011 for 7D, Sold for $2,000 to finance the 5DMKIII, net/net loss to date = -$3,000, 95% of the way to the next upgrade.

I can say this because that's NOT me. I run my gear into the ground and demand that it pay for itself in 6Months or less. When I am ready to pull the trigger, it's cause there's work in the waiting that will....reimburse me in 6Months or less for the right tools to get deliver the job.
I hope that I've been helpful :)
 
Good round-up here: http://www.eoshd.com/content/7289/5d-mark-iii-round-up

The video bitrate is said to be 91Mbit in 1080p ALL-I mode.

The 5D MK3 may also have a crop-function like the D800 - check out the link above!

What will be embarrassing for Nikon is if the 5D MK3 delivers a cleaner, more detailed picture in ALL-I mode vs the D800's uncompressed HDMI-out.

Overall, I'd wait four more weeks for NAB and find out where the 4K DSLR is at - if it's 12-18 months off, I think the 5D MK3 is a sensible purchase for those that want the best image and low-light quality in the DSLR form-factor.
 
dustylense said:
The more I read around the internet about peoples thoughts on this camera the more I'm struck on something. The $3500 price tag. I have shot with nearly every full frame canon digital since release. I paid $3200 for the brand new 5d. $3200 for the brand new 5Dmk2, both when they launched. Why are people crapping their pants about the $3500 price tag?
Click to expand...

because it's $800 higher than the price tag of the previous model at launch
if you paid $3200 for the 5D2, that's probably because you either got it with the kit lens, or had to pay some additional taxes: the launch price was $2700 http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10044432-1.html
expect to pay $4200 for the equivalent 5D3 deal http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/847546-REG/Canon_5260B009_EOS_5D_Mark_III.html

you're right that the 5D body only was $3300 at launch, maybe we got spoiled
or maybe there are more options now in the market: the 5D was one of the first full frame digital cameras, it only had to compete with the very high end canon of the time (1D2), nikon had no full frame camera yet I think
now there are several of them (the D800 being brand new tech too, and for $3000), and in the video segment a price of $3500 makes it have to compete with low-end big-sensor cameras (FS100, AF100), which are not that much more expensive

I'm not saying I'm angry at Canon or anything like that: it's their camera, they get to choose the price, all I can do is decide if I buy it or not - and I will make that decision in a month or two
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top