5D MKIII specs

I am basically at
If nothing better has come out 6 months from now when the price drops to $3200 or less on some holiday special I'll probably get one. There is unlikely to be anything "better" for my purposes at that price point by then.
 
oh, and by the way, I just confirmed this: maximum resolution for stills is 5760 x 3840
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/2

which, as I noted yesterday, is exactly (1920x3)x(1280x3)
I'll take that as very good news:
* it means the sensor was designed with video in mind
* it means 1080p images are probably going to be very, very sharp
* it's great for a 1.5x crop mode with exactly the same sensor structure of the C300 (4 photosites for each pixel); we haven't heard about a crop mode yet, but there are some indications that it may be there
* it may mean a modified Bayer pattern with a 3x3 basic module - I think we would have heard about that already if it was the case, but anyway: it could be a very nice thing



edit: for those expecting a price fall in the coming months: maybe the D800 will trigger that, but it took 3 years for the 5D2 to go from $2700 to $2400
 
Last edited:
So how does this compared to the D800?

For someone with neither Canon or Nikon loyalty, who will probably never shoot with an external recorder, which system is looking like the better option?

Also when is the release date of the D800?
 
NormanBates said:
oh, and by the way, I just confirmed this: maximum resolution for stills is 5760 x 3840
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/2

which, as I noted yesterday, is exactly (1920x3)x(1280x3)
I'll take that as very good news:
* it means the sensor was designed with video in mind
* it means 1080p images are probably going to be very, very sharp
* it may mean a modified Bayer pattern with a 3x3 basic module - I think we would have heard about that already if it was the case, but anyway: it could be a very nice thing
Click to expand...

Ahaaaa! That makes total sense.

I think it's just a normal Bayer pattern though...

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
roxics said:
So how does this compared to the D800? For someone with neither Canon or Nikon loyalty, who will probably never shoot with an external recorder, which system is looking like the better option? Also when is the release date of the D800?
Click to expand...

Allegedly the 5DM3 doesn't feature clean/uncluttered 1080p HDMI out, but may feature a very good internal codec implementation. Maybe.

A competent head-to-head comparison between the 2 cams can't be done until final production versions of both are available. My guess it'll be at least 4-8 weeks before we see carefully done side-by-side tests.

In the meantime, we all get to do a lot of reading.
 
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.

Because the price of electronic components goes down over time, and their capabilities go up. That's been true for decades - since the birth of the industry. The only reason the price keeps the same year after year for the same model series (Apple!) is because of marketing pricing power. It's slightly different for things like optics, but in this case we're discussing a camera. Canon - and any company - charges what they charge because they can. And we the consumers are the ultimate arbiters of worth - through our purchasing decisions. So if people are complaining about the price, it's a legitimate consumer response. And in this case it is not unreasonable. Canon is not putting in magical pixie dust of the costliest unobtainium in this camera. It's bog standard stuff, electronic components the price of which is dropping like a rock. Yes, there's R&D, marketing and other costs, but nothing out of the ordinary. The consumer sees this, judges what the camera delivers, and thinks the $3500 is too much - another thinks it's cheap. The market will decide.

Personally, I look at what this camera delivers for my needs and I wouldn't pay $3500 - it's laughable. Somebody else may see it as a fantastic deal. So it goes.
 
OldCorpse 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.

Because the price of electronic components goes down over time, and their capabilities go up. That's been true for decades - since the birth of the industry. The only reason the price keeps the same year after year for the same model series (Apple!) is because of marketing pricing power. It's slightly different for things like optics, but in this case we're discussing a camera. Canon - and any company - charges what they charge because they can. And we the consumers are the ultimate arbiters of worth - through our purchasing decisions. So if people are complaining about the price, it's a legitimate consumer response. And in this case it is not unreasonable. Canon is not putting in magical pixie dust of the costliest unobtainium in this camera. It's bog standard stuff, electronic components the price of which is dropping like a rock. Yes, there's R&D, marketing and other costs, but nothing out of the ordinary. The consumer sees this, judges what the camera delivers, and thinks the $3500 is too much - another thinks it's cheap. The market will decide.

Personally, I look at what this camera delivers for my needs and I wouldn't pay $3500 - it's laughable. Somebody else may see it as a fantastic deal. So it goes.
Click to expand...
I guess we can all just forget that tsunami then. The great thing is, YOU DON'T have to buy it. But the funny thing is, it will sell millions of units. Just as the previous 2 versions have done.
 
dustylense said:
I guess we can all just forget that tsunami then. The great thing is, YOU DON'T have to buy it. But the funny thing is, it will sell millions of units. Just as the previous 2 versions have done.
Click to expand...

No need for this tone. He wasn't directing anything toward anyone, just stating his opinion like everyone else in this thread.
 
I guess we can all just forget that tsunami then. The great thing is, YOU DON'T have to buy it. But the funny thing is, it will sell millions of units. Just as the previous 2 versions have done.


The tsunami is not a factor. A manufacturer who is in a competitive market adjusts his cost structure to that market reality - it would be silly for a baker to raise his prices because he broke a leg and it's harder for him to move around. In any case, the tsunami was long ago enough for the economic impact on manufacturing to be gone - remember, whole countries whose entire industrial and manufacturing capabilities were utterly destroyed after WWII (including Japan), way, way, way worse than the tsunami, within a few years turned into economic export engines. The tsunami was already a year ago - that's an eternity in fast turnaround flexible outsourcing manufacturing industries - it's laughable to think Canon hasn't managed to completely recover their manufacturing capability.

And yes, I don't have to buy it. But that's marketing - finding the best price for the biggest return. Sure it will sell very well, but perhaps it would sell better for a bigger profit overall through greater volume at a lower price (or not - who knows). That's the point of price discussions. It's a reality that price resistance exists. So I don't understand why you're put off that some consumers find the price too high. Canon made a judgment, and we're responding across the spectrum.
 
I am not sure but as I have understand it there isn't any actual price increase. It is the dollar that is going downhill. Of course imported goods will be more expensive if your money is worth less.
 
good post :-)

NormanBates said:
oh, and by the way, I just confirmed this: maximum resolution for stills is 5760 x 3840
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/2

which, as I noted yesterday, is exactly (1920x3)x(1280x3)
I'll take that as very good news:
* it means the sensor was designed with video in mind
* it means 1080p images are probably going to be very, very sharp
* it's great for a 1.5x crop mode with exactly the same sensor structure of the C300 (4 photosites for each pixel); we haven't heard about a crop mode yet, but there are some indications that it may be there
* it may mean a modified Bayer pattern with a 3x3 basic module - I think we would have heard about that already if it was the case, but anyway: it could be a very nice thing



edit: for those expecting a price fall in the coming months: maybe the D800 will trigger that, but it took 3 years for the 5D2 to go from $2700 to $2400
Click to expand...
 
Kholi said:
dustylense said:
OldCorpse 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.

Because the price of electronic components goes down over time, and their capabilities go up. That's been true for decades - since the birth of the industry. The only reason the price keeps the same year after year for the same model series (Apple!) is because of marketing pricing power. It's slightly different for things like optics, but in this case we're discussing a camera. Canon - and any company - charges what they charge because they can. And we the consumers are the ultimate arbiters of worth - through our purchasing decisions. So if people are complaining about the price, it's a legitimate consumer response. And in this case it is not unreasonable. Canon is not putting in magical pixie dust of the costliest unobtainium in this camera. It's bog standard stuff, electronic components the price of which is dropping like a rock. Yes, there's R&D, marketing and other costs, but nothing out of the ordinary. The consumer sees this, judges what the camera delivers, and thinks the $3500 is too much - another thinks it's cheap. The market will decide.

Personally, I look at what this camera delivers for my needs and I wouldn't pay $3500 - it's laughable. Somebody else may see it as a fantastic deal. So it goes.
Click to expand...

I guess we can all just forget that tsunami then. The great thing is, YOU DON'T have to buy it. But the funny thing is, it will sell millions of units. Just as the previous 2 versions have done.
Click to expand...

No need for this tone. He wasn't directing anything toward anyone, just stating his opinion like everyone else in this thread.
Click to expand...
On the price tag, keep in mind the dollar against the yen is not worthing as same as in September 2008, but more than 30% less... Only need for facts :-)
 
Simon Shasha said:
The higher launch price could have something to do with the tsunami - not sure though.
Click to expand...
Tsunami aside, economy is not opinion :-)

klas said:
I am not sure but as I have understand it there isn't any actual price increase. It is the dollar that is going downhill. Of course imported goods will be more expensive if your money is worth less.
Click to expand...
I hadn't seen your post yet, but it is fully accurate.
 
Digigenic said:
I'm confused, are you talking about the samples or in-camera default? Seems strange either way.
Click to expand...

The camera. Somewhere there's a post stating, from Chuck Westfall, that you can't go above 24000 (whatever that ISO is) in Video.

Movie mode does not use the expanded ISO range, highest you can go is 25,600 in movie.
Click to expand...
 
Kholi said:
The camera. Somewhere there's a post stating, from Chuck Westfall, that you can't go above 24000 (whatever that ISO is) in Video.
Click to expand...

So it basically goes further than the FS100 which tops out at +30dB which is 16000ISO. Looking at the images around this value, wow, the 5dm3 is really clean at those settings from the images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top