Canon 5D MK3 video spec?

K

kede

Active member
Hi everyone,

Before buying a Nikon D800 I'm asking myself what could Canon do with the 5D MKIII video speacking.

First of all i'm 99,99% sure that it will be 1080p. I talked a lot with a (drunk) Canon representant and he told me
that "there won't be any 4K system from Canon before te 4k become a reference".

As they just launched the EOS C300, It can't be possible that the 5d MK3 video will looks better and propose
more things.

What do you think Canon will do with the 5D MKIII video?

Do you think I can go to the D800 with eyes closed? (I've got Zeiss 35/50/85 1.4 Nikon mount (but it can be changed easly) )

Excuse me for my english...
 
I have a horrible feeling that Canon may not do much to improve the video on the 5D MK3, because they will not want to compete with either the EOS-1D X or the EOS-C300 cameras.
 
kede said:
Hi everyone,

Before buying a Nikon D800 I'm asking myself what could Canon do with the 5D MKIII video speacking.

First of all i'm 99,99% sure that it will be 1080p. I talked a lot with a (drunk) Canon representant and he told me
that "there won't be any 4K system from Canon before te 4k become a reference".

As they just launched the EOS C300, It can't be possible that the 5d MK3 video will looks better and propose
more things.

What do you think Canon will do with the 5D MKIII video?

Do you think I can go to the D800 with eyes closed? (I've got Zeiss 35/50/85 1.4 Nikon mount (but it can be changed easly) )

Excuse me for my english...
Click to expand...

Canon is reaching an inflection point. Either they wake up and smell the coffee or risk losing lots of customers.

They stand to lose on two fronts if they don't give what videographers want. Assuming the 5D MKIII/x is a disappointment, then under that scenario people will simply switch to the D800 OR will rely on the secondary market and buy used 5D MKII's. In either case, Canon does not make money from the sale of the camera body.

Simply put, the growth area for DSLR's is in video. Nikon realizes it which is why photographers didn't find the D4 too revolutionary, but to the video guys, the D4 provided much relief to the same old traditional rhetoric.
 
TheDingo said:
I have a horrible feeling that Canon may not do much to improve the video on the 5D MK3, because they will not want to compete with either the EOS-1D X or the EOS-C300 cameras.
Click to expand...

People keep saying this, but they don't make their money off of $16K C300s or even the 1D series. They make their bread and butter off of their consumer/semi-pro DSLRs. Their DSLRs are going to have to intrude into their video camera division or Nikon will just skin them alive. The video aspect of DSLRs is what offers the most potential for growth in sales. Right now, Nikon has Canon over a barrel. I will wait, but if Canon is going to continue going down this road of not offering a stupid headphone jack or uncompressed HDMI out or tracking AF for subjects, I WILL MOVE TO NIKON.
 
f64manray said:
People keep saying this, but they don't make their money off of $16K C300s or even the 1D series. They make their bread and butter off of their consumer/semi-pro DSLRs.
Click to expand...

Preach on.

Canon makes makes most of their money on glass and other non-camera gear. I'm guessing the ceiling on sales for the C300 is pretty low - not many indie guys want to drop $16 K for an 8 bit camera they might shoot 2 movies on; Alexa shooters are, well, gonna stick with Alexa; rental houses have already ordered the camera - as have high end Canon pro shooters like Phil Bloom and Philip Johnston.

Docs and some TV shows will pick up the C300... but who else who hasn't already ordered it? In other words, why protect something that's already half way through its sales cycle?

On the other hand, if they sell 200,000 thousand Mark IIIs in 2012 (not impossible, as Nikon rumors is reporting that Nikon is making 30,000 D800 a month), that's tens of thousand of kit glass sales, batteries - everything.

So you're right on the money - if they try to protect the C300, they're literally giving away the market that they essentially created with the Mark II.
 
It seems that with a few tweaks to the new camera it would just about rival the c300 or am i wrong?

I too am waiting to see what canon does otherwise i'll sell my stuff and go to a other brand. Nikon isn'nt in the video business and i would expect that they wouldnt have a problem to make a good dslr with video function. Let's see how the d4 or d800 actually perform.
 
aras said:
It seems that with a few tweaks to the new camera it would just about rival the c300 or am i wrong?
Click to expand...

Unless it has the same sensor and processing technology, it won't - that is the defining feature of the C300. Not to mention all the other features like timecode sync, HD-SDI, XLR's, internal ND filters, wireless operation and focus control, detachable monitor, EVF, dual CF card slots with redundant recording, unlimited record time, etc, etc, etc. And that's not even getting into IQ, resolution and moire & aliasing performance.

No doubt it will be a very nice camera, and better than it's predecessors for video. But it won't be built for professional video applications. Like the Nikon D800 and all other video DSLR's, it will be a compromise in order to be capable of also producing high-quality and high-resolution still photographs.
 
TheDingo said:
I have a horrible feeling that Canon may not do much to improve the video on the 5D MK3,
Click to expand...

It will be interesting what the sleeping giant will release, but to be sure it will be based on global sales projections over the following 36 months. They will improve it to the extent that best benefits the share holders. Wait and see.
 
Yeah, I can't see the Mark III having a 4K sensor. And to be fair, I haven't seen too many people clamoring for it.

No, I think most of use would be happy with less moire/jello, and clean HDMI out (plus manual audio & headphone jack). Maybe a bit better battery life and a bit better dynamic range. Surely a better LCD screen.

For still shooters, faster auto-focus a few more still frames per second... And that's it. I certainly wouldn't expect something to truly rock the video heavens.

But as long as Canon has the above features, I'd pay $2,500-3,000 for it. And I'm guessing so would a lot of people. I think what what most shooters want/expect is a Mark II, but better.
 
Same AF as 7D.
60fps @720p (doubt we will see 60fps @1080p).
Better HDMI out.
Headphone jack.
Upgrade to LCD screen.

That's all it would take for me to upgrade from my 5D2.
 
Not at $3,500, at least not for me. A headphone jack + headphone jack not worth $1,500....

Now if the video is amazing - say C300 good - then sure. But otherwise, that's a lot of scratch for relatively minor upgrades.
 
jdv said:
Preach on.

Canon makes makes most of their money on glass and other non-camera gear. I'm guessing the ceiling on sales for the C300 is pretty low - not many indie guys want to drop $16 K for an 8 bit camera they might shoot 2 movies on; Alexa shooters are, well, gonna stick with Alexa; rental houses have already ordered the camera - as have high end Canon pro shooters like Phil Bloom and Philip Johnston.

Docs and some TV shows will pick up the C300... but who else who hasn't already ordered it? In other words, why protect something that's already half way through its sales cycle?

On the other hand, if they sell 200,000 thousand Mark IIIs in 2012 (not impossible, as Nikon rumors is reporting that Nikon is making 30,000 D800 a month), that's tens of thousand of kit glass sales, batteries - everything.

So you're right on the money - if they try to protect the C300, they're literally giving away the market that they essentially created with the Mark II.
Click to expand...

I think you're forgetting that the world of videographers isn't that big. 5D's sales don't depend on the video functionality, 4-5% at most.
It's a nice gimmick to have on a full frame camera, but most people are buying it for the quality stills.
 
BlackWolf said:
I think you're forgetting that the world of videographers isn't that big. 5D's sales don't depend on the video functionality, 4-5% at most.
It's a nice gimmick to have on a full frame camera, but most people are buying it for the quality stills.
Click to expand...

I feel your statement was true for maybe the first year of sales, but once people figured out how nice it shot video. My guess is that in the last few years of sales the vast majority were bought for nothing but the video feature. most 5d's you see for sale have very low pictures taken on them.
 
maranfilms said:
I feel your statement was true for maybe the first year of sales, but once people figured out how nice it shot video. My guess is that in the last few years of sales the vast majority were bought for nothing but the video feature. most 5d's you see for sale have very low pictures taken on them.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you but then again all I know are videographers, not many photographers.
 
maranfilms said:
I feel your statement was true for maybe the first year of sales, but once people figured out how nice it shot video. My guess is that in the last few years of sales the vast majority were bought for nothing but the video feature. most 5d's you see for sale have very low pictures taken on them.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it make sense to buy a 7D/Ti3 if you're just after video? Much cheaper and pretty much the same video quality.
 
It's the hybrid nature of the 5D which provided it with stratospheric sales, notthe traditional photographers despite what they might think. That said, hybrid is not the same as "professional videlgrapher". Canon needs to cater to the growing skillset of multi-faceted media makers and semi-amateurs who have become media wise. They don't have to make 4K 4.4.4 with the 5d. We will see a measured quality upgrade, but I am doubtful it will be even 4.2.2. Except for 8bit HDMI out. Less skew, less moire and a good old fashioned Canon camera strap.
 
BlackWolf said:
Wouldn't it make sense to buy a 7D/Ti3 if you're just after video? Much cheaper and pretty much the same video quality.
Click to expand...
A T3i/600D is much cheaper but as regards video quality it is indeed pretty much the same if the light is good but while you can record clean video on the 5DII at ISO3200 if it's well exposed you really wouldn't want to go above 800 on the T3i/600D so the 5DII has a clear two stop advantage in low light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top