New 5D MarkIII, is this what we've been waiting for?

[Guest]

* get rid of the magnesium body and weather sealing

I think there is a large number of both stills and video guys that were hoping the 5D3 would continue or even further the theme of affordable FF35. It's what people have been asking for for a long time (at least 4 years now). Though, it looks as if the popularity of the 5D2 somewhat pushed the successor onto new heights. A: popularity means they can charge more B: making an upgrade to a very popular model means you have to go to new heights to justify an upgrade. So, the cheap hybrid FF35 is still nowhere (unless you buy the 5D2 on sale or second hand) to be found.

Some of the disappointment with the 5D3 isn't that it isn't enough but that it is more than necessary. Strip it down.

 

[Guest]

"get rid of the magnesium body and weather sealing"

Not crazy about several of your suggestions, but this one is nuts.

At $3500+ that is nuts, but many would welcome a $2k+ FF35 body with modern guts. Especially factoring in the upgrade frequency on these things (~2yrs/ymmv). meh?

 

[John Caballero]

Sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about..... A swivel LCD can be placed in the SAME fixed position as a non one.

EXACTLY!!! My goodness. If you don't want it or need it or fear it is going to fall off, just don't use it! Don't take it out!!! What you have with an articulated LCD is more options!!! Is that so hard to comprehend. Geez.

 

[eco_bach]

Important to remember, as Phillip Bloom so aptly says...'Making any judgement on a camera based on specs alone is a HUGE mistake by anyone.' Let's wait till its out in the field and some real world tests can be performed. All other speculation on the video quality based solely on the few web compressed samples on the web are just that...speculation.

 

[gonzo_entertainment]

At $3500+ that is nuts, but many would welcome a $2k+ FF35 body with modern guts. Especially factoring in the upgrade frequency on these things (~2yrs/ymmv). meh?

Until the first time you're shooting outside and it starts raining getting the camera fairly damp before you can bust out the umbrellas. Or the first time you drop it and the plastic body shatters.

 

[Samuel H]

well, I just thought I couldn't ask them to develop and manufacture a whold new magnessium body, and still keep the price at $2200

given that I don't shoot in the rain anyway (a lot of my equipment, apart from the camera, would be ruined), the rebel is sturdy enough for me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1tTBncIsm8&feature=player_detailpage#t=830s

and also, I'm not asking them to stop selling the current 5D3, just add a low-cost option below it, with the same image quality but a lot less stills features

 

[gonzo_entertainment]

I mean yes you'd care less about busting a $2000 body than 1 $3500 body, but the hassle of replacing it, even with insurance, is worth a couple hundred bucks to me.

 

[EIREHotspur]

Thing is....Canon are a Company....they are in it to make money first and foremost.

It isn't an Uncle Bob slaving away in the garden shed who will take on boards updates everyone wants.

They will leave out some options for tactical reasons.

Any camera that is going to better the 5D2 is good enough for me....the 29 minutes, headphone jack and dual slots made me happy.
No clean HDMI didn't but what can you do....I preordered yesterday.

 

[Samuel H]

my point is:
imagine they're taking $500 in profits for every 5D3 sold (out of which they have to repay fixed costs)
imagine they could cut costs by $1300 by getting rid of all I said (mainly: the mechanical parts) (*)
they could sell the shaved body for $2200, and still make $500 in profits for every unit sold
and I think they would sell a lot more at $2200 with reduced stills and weather sealing capabilities than at $3500 with their current setup

(*) yes, this is the main issue, and I'm making up that number, I have no idea how much the mechanical parts and AF system add to cost, but I guess it's a relatively big chunk, everything else goes cheaper with time

 

[Zephyrnoid]

You are going to have a VERY hard sell getting stills photographers to give up their mirror. NEVER happen for most over 40. You might over the course of a decade or so sell younger more open minded pros on it, but to even suggest such a thing to guys who learned to shoot on film would get you blank "WTF are you talking about!" stares from most working pro photographers.

Err. NO. You are talking about me, and sure, i am a bit eccentric compared to my contemporaries but sorry, Mirror has always been a primitive technology- necessary in an SLR but completely superfluous in the 21st century. I admit, I lost the mirror lust in 2005 when i sold all my film-based gear and picked up a Coolpix 5000 for 'personal pics'. My lust for a flip out screen and now for HD monitoring out of HDMI FAR outweighs mirror lust. It did take me a few months to relinquish the need for an SLR viewfinder, but only about 3 months.

Please explain why DSLR's even HAVE mirrors anymore?

 

[Zephyrnoid]

Break?

I can't count so many video cameras and dslrs where I have used an articulating screen, and I have never seen or broken one. Heck I film on My canon 60d almost everyday in the most wildest situations and I have never ever even been close to seeing it be damaged.....

The day you use an articulating screen you can never go back. So stop making excuses people.

well. of the few times i ever had any accident with cameras, in 2009 I tripped on a tripod leg and knocked the rig (ultralightweight) causing the flip-out screen to break from it's hinge. I subsequently rewired and and hot glued it back, albeit- non-articulating.
The flip out screen is the single greatest improvement to the ergonomics of small camera photography bar none. For years I avoided the first, second, third and fourth gen DSLR's because they lacked this feature that I became very used to.
I must admit, used in flip-out position it requires much more care than a fixed screen but hey, that's why they pay us the big bucks.
Also, what's the big deal with weatherproofing cameras? You guys never heard of AquaPac?
In 35 years I've only dunked a camera once (and it lived)

 

[Zephyrnoid]

We won't have to "sell" them. Time and the march of technology will take care of them.

When I was a boy in the 50s, my 'prosumer' Dad had a TLR - because that's what the magazines all said that the pros used. The pros wouldn't *think* of using one of those newfangled Japanese SLRs. I'll bet just about all of those pros are now dead.

I may be just young enough to see the day a few years (decades?) from now, when the pros who wouldn't give up their mirror boxes are either dead or retired, and no one in their right mind would pull their eye away from the viewfinder to switch from stills to video.

Is the age of the pentaprism mirror box over? Not quite yet - but the end is definitely in sight.

I guess I've been asleep for 20 years. DSLRs REALLY have pentaprisms still ??? So if I'd been awake I would have dealt with it sooner.

WHO the HEck RUNS THESE CAMERA DESIGN FACILITES???

 

[Jester2138]

You ask any photohrapher for Nat Geo or serious nature photographers in general and I highly doubt any of them would want a swivel-LCD.

I've worked for National Geographic as a producer. Trust me, we use whatever tool gets us the shot... In my experience, an articulating screen has made all the difference in the world on more than a few shots.

There's your answer...

 

[gonzo_entertainment]

Err. NO. You are talking about me, and sure, i am a bit eccentric compared to my contemporaries but sorry, Mirror has always been a primitive technology- necessary in an SLR but completely superfluous in the 21st century. I admit, I lost the mirror lust in 2005 when i sold all my film-based gear and picked up a Coolpix 5000 for 'personal pics'. My lust for a flip out screen and now for HD monitoring out of HDMI FAR outweighs mirror lust. It did take me a few months to relinquish the need for an SLR viewfinder, but only about 3 months.

Please explain why DSLR's even HAVE mirrors anymore?

Because with a viewfinder you are looking directly through the lens (via a mirror) not seeing a digital representation, skewed by god knows what, of the image.

 

[gonzo_entertainment]

I guess I am the other extreme in that I only put away my film cameras, to only rarely come, out in favor of digital about 18 months ago. Granted, not a pro, a hobbyist photographer.

 

[cowpunk52]

Please explain why DSLR's even HAVE mirrors anymore?

For the same reason that Arri is making an optical viewfinder for the Alexa:

"The optical viewfinder works without power and is less fatiguing to the eye than electronic viewfinders. With zero delay, these viewfinders show exactly what is happening, right when it is happening through the taking lens."
​

Optical viewfinders in DSLRs aren't going anywhere anytime soon, especially in professional product lines.

"The optical viewfinder works without power and is less fatiguing to the eye than electronic viewfinders. With zero delay, these viewfinders show exactly what is happening, right when it is happening through the taking lens."
The optical viewfinder works without power and is less fatiguing to the eye than electronic viewfinders. With zero delay, these viewfinders show exactly what is happening, right when it is happening through the taking lens."​

 

[ICD Films]

There's your answer...

Whatever floats!! I can think of a lot of scenarios that i wouldnt want a flip LCD. If it works great for you.

...so Canon sucks at market research then if everyone wanted a flip LCD on 5dmk3 & 1DX......

 

[iunknown]

I was reading that the mirror has been redesigned and might be an issue with alt. glass. Anyone else read this?

 

[randomname]

I'm sorry but this comment is even less intelligent--. What are you saying -- pros that buy pro camera bodies are stubborn old geezers because they don't "get the idea" with swivel-LCD's? If you want a non-fixed LCD well most cameras don't have it... so if you're trying to make some point here please do. Price point, less MP count... list goes on. Canon has made a move. And where does the swivel-LCD come in in all this? Sorry but if ranting please be relevant.

I'm not a pro so but I know how some of their cameras tend to look like... put it in the laundry before the wedding gig!!

My point is, as counterintuitive as it sounds, that decisions on new features shouldn't only be based on what the consumer wants at that moment. Innovation is driven by entrepreneurs knowing what the consumers will want better than the consumers themselves. How many cinematographers do you think would have said they want a digital camera 20 years ago? Nearly all of them would have said that film is the only way to shoot a movie. If product decisions were only based on what the consumer said they wanted right then and there, we would have no alexas, reds, or HDSLRs at all.

 

[John Caballero]

I may be just young enough to see the day a few years (decades?) from now, when the pros who wouldn't give up their mirror boxes are either dead or retired, and no one in their right mind would pull their eye away from the viewfinder to switch from stills to video.

Is the age of the pentaprism mirror box over? Not quite yet - but the end is definitely in sight.

Exactly. I remember back in the early 70's when I was about 12 years one of my early photography mentors told me about an article he read that spoke about the coming of auto focus cameras! He was adamant about focusing manually and about how those cameras wouldn't catch on. Only if he was still alive today....