Canon 5D MKIII Spotted In The Wild?

Searcher said:
Plenty of people like a full frame sensor. That alone will keep it in the game against the GH2 even if other features and qualities are lacking in comparison. I'm just saying that it wont need to blow the GH2 out of the water to remain competitive.
Click to expand...

Yeah it will be a popular release, that I'm sure of...but down the road is where I see the landscape changing, and if the moire and aliasing is still there...it will for sure. I personally think they will have it "fixed" on the MK3....but we will see. The problem comes (for Nikon and Canon with DSLR video) in that they have a long life cycle for these flagship models....while simpler cameras from many different manufacturers are being pushed out non stop. Simpler meaning, they don't have to deal with a mirror flipping out of the way and other things....might make it hard for them to keep up after a while.
 
OldCorpse said:
My suspicion is that Canon will fumble this. They'll deliver incremental improvements to the 5DIII compared to 5DII, because they have to protect their pro video division
Click to expand...

Yes, I can agree this is the strategy they were going to employ. That's pretty obvious by the way they F'd up the 1DX. Giving me audio meters while recording but no way to listen to them. That was a sad attempt to protect the C300. What did it gain them? The result is that a loyal Canon customer (me) is now seriously considering the D4. And I'm sure I represent thousands of others that have the same mind set. The 1DX is not even on my radar screen anymore. It's obsolete before it's even released. They can't play that game without putting their DSLRs in peril because Nikon will crush them. They have to just go for it and make these DSLRs as good as possible. What's more important to them, their pro line video cams or their DSLR line? That $16K market is a drop in the bucket compared to the $1-2,500K DSLR market. It's a quandry for them, but they have to realize they'll need to cannibalize themselves in order to come out alive on the other side or just starve to death while my friends and I go over to Nikon. Nikon is going to announce the D800 soon. I imagine video wise, it will be similar to the D4. You're move Canon. Frankly, I'm spending more time looking at Nikon glass and learning the way of Nikon. In twenty years, I've never considered that. But here I am.
 
I just don't look at it the same way, Canon is going to focus their still cameras on being a still camera first. Look at it from the other perspective. You are a still shooter and you don't even care about audio, yet, here you are basically being forced to pay for video, microphones, extra processing power for video handling. So we as video shooter want these features in the camera, but, those features cost money, weight, power, redesign, etc.

This is why I think Canon has some tough decisions. I personally don't think it's about protecting the C300 because the designs are purposefully different. While I really do want Canon to add things like an audio jack to the 7D, manual audio control, better downsampling, etc, I also understand that their focus is a still camera like I said.

Now, given that, the other camera shown with the C300 is being designed to address the DSLR form factor for video shooting. They get it from what I can see. Now, will it be what everyone wants? That's still unknown, but even they acknowledged that they do know what people are asking for. Sure, I'd like it to get here faster, but then, I'd like it to be a lot better than what the current Canon DSLRs deliver.

For instance, I don't want a mirror in my 7D. I don't want a flash.

I for one am absolutely not impressed with Nikon in the least. The D90 was one of the WORST video implementations I have ever seen. I own a D90, and I use it for stills. NEVER for video. Every Nikon camera I've used since then has never impressed me. Why would I EVER have faith that the D4 is going to be any better? I don't want an external recorder. I don't use one with my FS100. I've seen the D4 videos floating around and the aliasing does not look too promising. I'd be moving to a GH2 before I moved to a Nikon at this point.

But, I'm going to save my judgement on the 1DX and D4 till after they ship to a large group of people and they are in action.
 
Let's not forget many Canon photographers crossed over to shoot video too. With all their investment in Canon lenses and the familiarity with Canon camera, I think the Canon 5Dmk3 will still sell plenty.
Canon has created a new generation of shooters. This generation of DSLR shooter will always prefer the form factor of a DSLR compare to a video camera. Most have adapted well to the DSLR shortcomings and make a good living with it.
I think Canon will sell plenty to this group of user who has no baggage of comparing it to a traditional video camera. Maybe it's like comparing HDMI to SDI :) One camp will like to see SDI connector on the DSLR and the other camp will ask for what? Don't we have HDMI already?
 
Last edited:
Rick Burnett said:
I just don't look at it the same way, Canon is going to focus their still cameras on being a still camera first. Look at it from the other perspective. You are a still shooter and you don't even care about audio, yet, here you are basically being forced to pay for video, microphones, extra processing power for video handling. So we as video shooter want these features in the camera, but, those features cost money, weight, power, redesign, etc.
Click to expand...

Canon should do an experiment. They should release a canon 5d mark 3 without video capabilities.. none at all... Obviously, it will be cheaper than the comparable nikon, sony, etc. that has video. How many of these cameras do you think canon will sell???? I doubt many.... Even if it was a thousand dollars cheaper than a comparable camera w/video. If they keep on focusing on "still camera first", they will fail.

After thinking about it, I have misgivings with canon. I doubt they will innovate. Have they ever innovated? The 5d mark 2 was a mistake w/ respect to video. It should never have came about. Historically, canon is all about maximizing profit instead of creating/nurturing new markets. Just look at their bubble jet printers. Canon continues to sell their printers cheap, but their cartridges expensive. I use to have a bubble jet printer. I replaced it with a cheaper laser printer. A "Brother" laser printer no less... A lot of people I know has done the same.. How big of a market is the bubble jet printer field now? Not very big.. The only thing canon did was milk the bubble jet field for whats it worth -- they didn't create any new innovation.

Contrast this to what Steve jobs did while he was alive with Apple. He introduced the ipod. At the height of the ipod, he innovated and created the iphone. He went all out and dedicated resources and people to the iphone EVEN before the iphone was a big seller. He could have said, "apple is in the music business.. the music player business. Why the hell should apple be in the phone business?" At the end of the day, according to many people, he always regarded Apple as being in the consumer electronics field and listened to what people wanted... When the ipod was bringing in the money, he had the guts to put his best ipod engineers, employee's, etc. in the than risky and unproven "iphone" division (which ultimately cannibalized his own ipod department). When the iphone market was saturated, he did the same thing with the ipad.

Can people imagine Canon dedicating resources and people to the DSLR market -- bringing the best engineers canon has in the video department and making them work in the dslr video department w/o restraint? I doubt it. Heck, creating a separate Cinema division IN ADDITION to the DSLR division and the video division is already a bad sign. The C300 is a bad sign... Not to mention the 1dx (as f64manray noted ). If canon wanted, I have a feeling they could create a kick butt video dslr that would wipe everyone away. I doubt they will do it because they would have to (as someone already mention) cannibalize their video department. Canon does not seem like a company that will cannibalize their own departments in order to nurture and grow new markets -- I cannot remember a time when they did. Instead of a clean, quick pulling of the bandaid.. they seem to be trying to slow the inevitable. In other words, have other companies cannibalize their departments for them.

We will see within the next month or two if Canon is interested in this niche "dslr video" field. I am guessing they aren't. Like a few people here, after thinking about things, I also bet their next dslr will be an incremental improvement. They are good at what they do -- sustaining technology. Adding incrementally better focusing.. better dynamic range.. better ergonomics, more FPS, etc... But at the end of the day, I think they see themselves as being in the "stills pictures field" like Rich mentioned.. or the very expensive "video field"... They aren't in the relatively inexpensive video dslr field.

What does this mean? Nikon and panasonic will probably be the torch bearer for vdslr. But whatever, we'll see within the next few weeks. After thinking about things, and reading what other people have written, I guess I'm not really that anxious for the next canon dslr anymore. Its probably because my expectations have been lowered... Thanks people ;-P Unless Canon proves me wrong within this year, I'm going Nikon. It seems like Nikon tries harder. No matter what, its time to save money again... hhahaha..
 
eleison said:
Canon should do an experiment. They should release a canon 5d mark 3 without video capabilities.. none at all... Obviously, it will be cheaper than the comparable nikon, sony, etc. that has video. How many of these cameras do you think canon will sell???? I doubt many.... Even if it was a thousand dollars cheaper than a comparable camera w/video. If they keep on focusing on "still camera first", they will fail.
Click to expand...

head over to photography forums, and you'll find plenty of people saying "I've never used the video function in my camera, I have absolutely no interest in that, and if I had wanted video, I would have bought a video camera instead of 5D2 and 7D" - I know what you think of that, but they exist, and there are lots of them
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2538.0.html
offer a camera without video function for $1000 less and it will be a hot seller

in the same fashion: offer a camera without mirror, OVF, flash, flash trigger, etc, for $1000 less, and it will be a hot seller too
(hey, Canon, if you're listening: if you do this, please add a couple of 1/4" threads by the hotshoe mount; thanks)

difference between one proposal and the other: getting rid of the video function saves you a couple of pennies, getting rid of the mirror and OVF saves you quite a chunk of the manufacturing costs: there's a nice chance we'll get to see something like this (probably not for $1000 less, but maybe $500? I'd still take it, the mirror is just getting in the way)
 
As a person who shoots mainly stills on my 5D/7D and video with video cameras I think this situation is a mess. Having been on DPReview's forums for many years I think most of the photo world wants a good still camera and might mess around with video if it is there. More posts about video are showing up but a lot are from a complete beginner prospective which I would not think would be a large marketing segment for video.

I can give my opinion about Canon's approach but they don't care! I think they under-spec'd the C300 which makes it quite difficult to protect from their other lower models. Both Canon and Nikon are dealing with tech fatigue and image quality saturation with their products. For still shooters to upgrade from the 5DMKII it is going to take quite a camera, same goes with the 1-series shooters. The only things I want in a new stills camera are more dynamic range & cleaner mid/high ISOs, and the 1Dx and hopefully the 5DMKIII seem to be going in this direction. But the images out of the 5D are just beautiful and I am not going to upgrade just because the number is III instead of II.

Canon might surprise with the 1DX & MKIII. They pre-announced the 1DX which they usually do not do. I think this was a strategy to survey a bit before release. If they can add clean HDMI or 4:2:2 in the I-frame encoding they will be right there with the Nikon offerings. So I would not sell any lenses until all of the cameras are out and reviewed! Canon may be set in their ways but they do not like to lose!

About mirrors, don't forget that if they take the mirror away they need to add an LCD for the viewfinder. So it might be an even trade of cost for the R&D of putting the small LCD in. For stills, I like the optical path but for video mirrorless is better. I would not be opposed to mirrorless for stills as it is nice to see a representation of your metering for non-flash work.
 
NormanBates said:
head over to photography forums, and you'll find plenty of people saying "I've never used the video function in my camera, I have absolutely no interest in that, and if I had wanted video, I would have bought a video camera instead of 5D2 and 7D" - I know what you think of that, but they exist, and there are lots of them
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2538.0.html
offer a camera without video function for $1000 less and it will be a hot seller
Click to expand...

If that is the case, the 1dx will be a hot seller. From what I hear, with respect to still photos, its a beast. Its comparable to or even better than nikon's flagship d4 w/respect to still images.

However, assuming there are equal number of canon and nikon shooters; and if the d4 is as good with respect to video as people are thinking it is, I say the d4 will out sell the 1dx.

Too be honest, if I was really into "stills photography", I would just buy the previous flagship cameras (e.g., EOS-1D Mark III) -- the one's that don't do videos, but are excellent still photo tools and are less expensive.

Oh well, whatever... There are no signs that canon really cares about this niche, low margin, emerging video dslr market. Canon doesn't do "disruptive technology"... They are still trying to cater to their "established" customer base. Video dslr is a "disruptive technology" with a new customer base. Canon will get hurt. Well, see how many Canon 1dx's fly of the shelves; I bet it wouldn't be as many as the 5d mark 2 when it was first introduced.

http://web.mit.edu/6.933/www/Fall2000/teradyne/clay.html
 
Last edited:
Well given that the 1Dx has a pre-order price twice that of the5DII when released I would expect a *very* much smaller uptake. Remember the 1 series ocupies a much higher level than even the 5 series, which has always been marketed as a pro's second body or a serious enthusiast's aspirational body.

And I'll hold fire on making judgments as to the video from a youtube posting of a pre-release camera. BTW this is about the 5D III not the 1DX
 
dcloud said:
ok i saw some 1dx 7d comparison vid...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gtaa2IujS5I
tell me im wrong but it looks like the 1dx still has aliasing and color moire
Click to expand...

I'd be suspicious of that user. Notice he has a ton of Nikon "D4" videos as well. But there are never any videos that show them using the actual cameras. We don't really know that these are legit. Legit pre-production camera demos almost always have BTS stills or clips of them using the cameras.

Anyone can title their YouTube video anyway they want to get hits.

Canon does innovate. They created a whole new lens mount, EF, to support autofocus. This was a huge deal back in the day. They invented the Ultrasonic motor, which was later emulated by Nikon's Silentwave motor and Sigma's Hypersonic motors. They invented the fluorite lens element. They invented eye controlled focus. They invented optical image stabilization. They introduced the first full frame 35mm digital camera. They were the first to implement 1080P in DLSRs.
 
Last edited:
dcloud said:
ok i saw some 1dx 7d comparison vid...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gtaa2IujS5I
tell me im wrong but it looks like the 1dx still has aliasing and color moire
Click to expand...

First and foremost -- there is absolutely something wrong with that video. That's not 1Dx footage. Period. The best possible explanation is that was the AVCHD footage with "b frames" from the 1Dx that was encoded badly by the user and then further worsened by Youtube -- but -- even that doesn't add up. In its worst form the 1Dx is mind-blowingly sharper than the 7D in its best form. For the 1Dx think -- the best hacked GH2 footage you've ever seen but without any noise and low light that beats the best of anything you've ever seen from a D3.

And, even if you were to believe that video, aliasing on Youtube relates to the YouTube resolution in regard to window/screen size. For example, Youtube 1080 played back in their smallest window will create aliasing -- and variations on that theme. You'd want to play the 1080 on a real 1080 monitor for the best possible representation of the awful Youtube quality.

But -- the bottom line -- I'd bet the farm that video is fake.
 
Like some of you I'm not really expecting much with the next generation of Canon DSLRs. More interested in the next GH3 and Nikon's offerings. The AF100 and FS100 replacements are also of interest. Be happy to switch brands if another company offers an innovative un-gimped product.
 
chill out guys. No need to get aggressive. Heres the facebook page where i saw these vids.

Facebook.com/fencheljanisch

And i know of youtube resizing but i did saw colored moire which isnt created by that. Anyway, im still open minded not that i care if 1dx is great or not. Its not in my radar
 
Piolet said:
Canon does innovate. They created a whole new lens mount, EF, to support autofocus. This was a huge deal back in the day. They invented the Ultrasonic motor, which was later emulated by Nikon's Silentwave motor and Sigma's Hypersonic motors. They invented the fluorite lens element. They invented eye controlled focus. They invented optical image stabilization. They introduced the first full frame 35mm digital camera. They were the first to implement 1080P in DLSRs.
Click to expand...

Most management consultants(Peter drucker, Clayton M. Christensen, etc.) wouldn't call these innovation... they would probably say canon is improving on an existing technology. It is splitting hairs though. But to innovate to most management consultants is to create a new market for a product that hasn't existed before. Usually with a new customer base. Canon wasn't the first company to create a mass market digital camera. They may have been the first to introduce the "full frame" version, but that was improving on an existing technology. Professionals were already using dslrs from both Kodac and Nikon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera#History).

Innovations are things like wikipedia, plastics, gps, etc... Take gps. Before gps people used maps. There were no customer base for gps because... well , there were no such thing as gps for consumers. Garmin created the first consumer friendly gps and that basically created a new customer base. Garmin was an innovator with respect to gps.

Canon does not innovate. They only improve on existing products. For instance, inventing "optical image stabilization" did not create a new customer base, it only catered to the existing customer base -- the same old photography crowd. That can also be said of "eye controlled focus".

The only thing that canon can kinda say they innovated was the " 1080P in DLSRs". This created a new market for people who wanted to get into "film quality" videos w/o spending a ton of money. People like me and many others on this forum. However, did canon really innovate this on purpose????????????????? I highly doubt it. They may have started this revolution, but they didn't really do it on purpose. I don't expect their next 5d to be very impressive. They will be dragging their heels...
 
The more I read and think about this is we are thinking to much about one camera that is a next gen 5DMKIII. We know Canon has a cinema EOS on tap and that camera will probably have what the video shooter wants in the form factor they are used to. The 5DMKII DSLR update version will be more photo friendly.
The GH2 is a good example of a camera that is designed to do both well at a very affordable price.

The tough part for Canon is not to bring to market a camera that could hurt the C300. The 5DMKII took sales away from video cameras for at least two years. That’s a big challenge and unfortunately they have to protect that product, so I don’t see the DSLR you all want for $3K coming out. I hope I’m wrong but Sony and Panasonic have a track record of doing just that in their broadcast cameras.
 
Erik Naso said:
The tough part for Canon is not to bring to market a camera that could hurt the C300. The 5DMKII took sales away from video cameras for at least two years. That’s a big challenge and unfortunately they have to protect that product, so I don’t see the DSLR you all want for $3K coming out. I hope I’m wrong but Sony and Panasonic have a track record of doing just that in their broadcast cameras.
Click to expand...
+30 Luv my 5d but with all of the great cameras available and on the horizon, I find that I really don't care about a 5DMKIII.
 
Innovations aren't measured in how big they are. Autofocus, optical lens stabilization, etc are all innovations. They are new methods for doing things. Previously, you had to manually focus. Previously you had to lock down a shot. Things like moving a button from one side of the camera to another is not. But, adding new technology, even to existing technology, is innovating.

Sure, their motives are for sales, which only makes sense. That's the point of innovating in the first place, you are trying to show someone that you have a different better way of doing something that makes your product superior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top