True that. I understand people saying that it's not for everyone. But to those who will still buy it please stop denying this camera had an horrible video upgrade (ON PURPOSE!)
5D MKIII specs
- Thread starter squig
- Start date
True that. I understand people saying that it's not for everyone. But to those who will still buy it please stop denying this camera had an horrible video upgrade (ON PURPOSE!)
@squig I'll have to upload them when I get off work.
@-Sandro- How good the upgrade is really does depend on what you do. I don't do shorts or features and have no aspiration to but I guess I can see why some people are upset. For me tho 60p in a full frame body, better build, better low light, and reduced aliasing and moire was enough of a upgrade for me to purchase and be happy with it. I honestly say don't knock something based off of what you hear and actually do your own tests before you draw conclusions.
@-Sandro- How good the upgrade is really does depend on what you do. I don't do shorts or features and have no aspiration to but I guess I can see why some people are upset. For me tho 60p in a full frame body, better build, better low light, and reduced aliasing and moire was enough of a upgrade for me to purchase and be happy with it. I honestly say don't knock something based off of what you hear and actually do your own tests before you draw conclusions.
Danielvilliers
Veteran
Yes, just move the price point higher. Have a true successor to the 5d2 in philosophy but at a much higher price point. The marketing pitch would be, hey we have this shiny new camera that is done for you video folks (we listen to you) it will cost $ 5/7/10 k and is optimise for video so no inherent camera problem. You don't have the money, hey don't worry you have the 5d3 but you do understand it is a photo camera first and then video.
This is quite intelligent, because buy creating a new category, lets call it video centric first and photo perhaps second, they can charge more.
squig
Veteran
I've been reading so many opinions and pixel peeping so much the last couple of days it's all a blur now....ask him.
There is just no way that is even close to the truth.... Article or no article. I'd be amazed if even 8% were bought for video use.
thekreative
Veteran
I'd love to read that article. 8% sounds about right. I still have people ask me when am I going to get the video camera out. I would think that most people don't even think about buying video cameras for filming their families with the quality of iPhones etc.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
it was a youtube video with a guy talking - a Canon guy was in the room, but not in camera - when he said that figure, the guy in the video looked sideways suspiciously: either he was making the number up, or was not supposed to speak it loud (I know which one I'd bet for)
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
Well, they can realistically track that the same way statistics and polls are made. And for the most part, they're surprisingly accurate. Have you or even anyone you know ever had a Nielsen box? I sure haven't, but the TV ratings are guaranteed to some crazy degree of accuracy.
When you fill out the warranty card, you take a small survey. When you signup for CPS, you take a small survey. If I remember correctly, they even asked me to take the survey when sending a unit in for repair. That simple.
I can't believe that 80% of 5D mkII's are used for video only. We are talking about a camera that is a mainstay of pros stills photographers who are not sports shooters, and probably the most popular high end enthusiast's camera on the market. The reason DSLRs are so affordable compared to specialist video cameras is that they sell in massively bigger volumes than specialist video cameras. As someone else said I would have thought 8% was an optimistic figure, and it might not even be that.
I've been reading this thread with interest and the thing I notice most is that people are tending to lose sight of how DSLRs are primarily stills cameras and that is where the volume sales are. If you spent any time on stills forums you would know just how irked a lot of stills shooters are that there is even video on DSLRs. The thing about the 5D mkIII is that it ticks all the boxes that stills photographers were asking for and what they were critical of on the 5D mkII. The main criticism of the 5D mkII from the stills photography perspective, was the AF was slow and out of date, the drive rate was too slow for sports and the weatherproofing was not really up to scratch. The only fly in the ointment for Canon was the Nikon D800 which has a much higher resolution and is quite a bit cheaper.
The video implementation is a bit lame in the 5D mkIII and it gives an impression of what Canon's overall strategy is. It's good enough for the main market for the 5D mkIII, stills pros who want video, enthusiasts who want video on their DSLR, and videographers/filmmakers who are willing to put up with its limitations. There's been no effort by Canon to really push it as a camera intended for its video. However I don't think Canon deliberately crippled the 5D mkIII as a video camera. My guess is that they just saw no point in making more of an effort. This class of camera has a long product life, typically 3 years or more and Canon would have been well aware that no matter how much they pimped up the 5D mkIII for video, that well before the end of its product life it would be left in the dust as far as video is concerned. Sony will be bringing out FF SLT cameras and it's not unlikely there could be 2 more iterations of the GH before the end of the 5D mkIII's product life. That's not counting all the other stuff that will come along. I think Canon knew if they had pushed the 5D mkIII for video, that in a year or 2 there would have been a lot of complaints because it was lagging so far behind the opposition. That sort of thing is bad for their image, but not really a problem if they never marketed it for video.
I've been reading this thread with interest and the thing I notice most is that people are tending to lose sight of how DSLRs are primarily stills cameras and that is where the volume sales are. If you spent any time on stills forums you would know just how irked a lot of stills shooters are that there is even video on DSLRs. The thing about the 5D mkIII is that it ticks all the boxes that stills photographers were asking for and what they were critical of on the 5D mkII. The main criticism of the 5D mkII from the stills photography perspective, was the AF was slow and out of date, the drive rate was too slow for sports and the weatherproofing was not really up to scratch. The only fly in the ointment for Canon was the Nikon D800 which has a much higher resolution and is quite a bit cheaper.
The video implementation is a bit lame in the 5D mkIII and it gives an impression of what Canon's overall strategy is. It's good enough for the main market for the 5D mkIII, stills pros who want video, enthusiasts who want video on their DSLR, and videographers/filmmakers who are willing to put up with its limitations. There's been no effort by Canon to really push it as a camera intended for its video. However I don't think Canon deliberately crippled the 5D mkIII as a video camera. My guess is that they just saw no point in making more of an effort. This class of camera has a long product life, typically 3 years or more and Canon would have been well aware that no matter how much they pimped up the 5D mkIII for video, that well before the end of its product life it would be left in the dust as far as video is concerned. Sony will be bringing out FF SLT cameras and it's not unlikely there could be 2 more iterations of the GH before the end of the 5D mkIII's product life. That's not counting all the other stuff that will come along. I think Canon knew if they had pushed the 5D mkIII for video, that in a year or 2 there would have been a lot of complaints because it was lagging so far behind the opposition. That sort of thing is bad for their image, but not really a problem if they never marketed it for video.
Have you see the D800 footage? Definitely outperforms the 5d!
https://vimeo.com/38912704
https://vimeo.com/38912704
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
The wides don't look that much more detailed to me than the Mk3. Did you download the 1080 version? I'll do so at home tonight (slow connection at office).
But not that much better, if at all to be honest.
I'm beginning to think that great Full Frame comes when you get to a raw 5K workflow...
Maybe Canon already knows this, as well.
thekreative
Veteran
Just got mine and loving it. Off to a shoot.
Hunter Hampton
Carbonite Member
[FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]Got my 5dm3 yesterday- its definativly better than the 5dm2 in everyway. Really enjoying it. I'm really liking the technicolor cine style on it, neutral dialed down seems best for high iso, sharpening on 1 looks pretty good. It's no f3, c300, or epic but it does look pretty great!
The lack of color miore, minimized aliasing, build quality, iso performance, and even the locking mode dial (!!!!)- make it easily worth the price tag for me- this thing is awesome for $3500. Seems like yesterday we were shooting on cameras with a $3500 35mm adapter hanging off the front, it's easy to forget that... Really what are we complaining about? There are so many capable cameras today to fit any variety of budget- Let's shoot some ****![/FONT]
The lack of color miore, minimized aliasing, build quality, iso performance, and even the locking mode dial (!!!!)- make it easily worth the price tag for me- this thing is awesome for $3500. Seems like yesterday we were shooting on cameras with a $3500 35mm adapter hanging off the front, it's easy to forget that... Really what are we complaining about? There are so many capable cameras today to fit any variety of budget- Let's shoot some ****![/FONT]
squig
Veteran
Ahh man, you're killing me.
I was just starting to flip flop and leaning towards the D800 after having another look at "joy ride". The DXOmark dynamic range figures are off the charts and it does appear to resolve wide shots a little better. There's something I miss about the D90 look.....jello!
Do you feel the need to do any post sharpening @ +1? It does look slightly softer than the MKII. Were you shooting cinestyle IPB or ALL-I? I haven't heard any reports on or seen any 60p yet.
I gotta decide on Monday, got a film to make.
Cosimo Bullo
Veteran
Hunter, give us some footage to peep when you can. The stuff that's come out the past couple of days looks better and better. I feel like no one has found the sharpening sweet spot yet.
KyleProhaska
Veteran
Well Bloom just tweeted saying the post sharpening is where it's at as opposed to internal. He's liking what he sees...