aaronlam wrote:
DavidP, I actually did address the AF. We'll have to see HOW much better this tracking is compared to the current 1-series AF. I am sure I am not one to PUSH my 1DII to it's AF limits on a regular basis but I think all those cross-sensors is just hype. The 1DII AF's beautifully... I am sure the 1DIII will AF better but it sounds like a bit of overkill and not really a killer feature.
Actually, I wasn't thinking of the TRACKING ability, as much as the ability to reliably focus in low light. And also, the fact that there are now 19 AF points with cross-point and high-precision sensors, and they're not all jammed up in the middle of the frame. They're actually USABLE now.
I try not to shoot ISO 3200/1600 as much as possible. Sometimes, it is necessary but I am not happy when I have to. I appreciate the option that I CAN, but ISO6400 (if it is the same noise level as current ISO3200 or ISO3200 if it was the same as current ISO1600) would only be used in extreme and unusual circumstances... a nice option but also not a killer feature.
Some of us find that MOST of are shots at are ISO1600 and higher. So, for those of us who routinely shoot in low light without flash, this is GREAT news.
DavidP wrote:
Some of us find that MOST of are shots at are ISO1600 and higher. So, for those of us who routinely shoot in low light without flash, this is GREAT news.
I agree, I shoot a lot of highschool sports and other events (concerts etc), and 90% of my shots are ISO3200 @ f/2.8 to get a decent shutter. Although my results when shooting ISO3200 on my 20D are very acceptable to me, I'm extremely excited about the true ISO3200 of the MK3 and the expanded 6400. I've been waiting to upgrade for just this feature and I'm glad it came so soon for me. Not everybody shoots studio or has the luxury of owning the holy trinity, some of us have to resort to high ISO.
Please correct me is I am wrong but it looked like all those high precision sensors etc are still within that oval. That is why I think that is overkill. I wish they spread those suckers out a little more. It is good now but you have to have the subject in the middle (perfect for tracking). I'd me interested to see how much the tracking is improved with these sensors.
I'd be so sad if I had to shoot MOSTLY at ISO1600 or higher. Do you never shoot in daylight? Photography is the capture of light... not the capture of darkness I'm just kidding... yes.. if MOST of your shots are over ISO1600 and you already have super fast glass... then any reduction of noise at the high ISO's would be invaluable and a killer feature.
aaronlam wrote:
Please correct me is I am wrong but it looked like all those high precision sensors etc are still within that oval. That is why I think that is overkill. I wish they spread those suckers out a little more.
I think the physics makes it very difficult (if not impossible) to get the precise AF sensors much further out than they have them in the 1D-3. Remember, Nikon *appears* to have done it . . . but they're working with a 1.5x sensor, not a 1.3x sensor.
Do you never shoot in daylight? Photography is the capture of light... not the capture of darkness
Nope, I pretty much only shoot in darkness. And I don't use flash then.
It's funny, but when I *do* shoot in daylight, I often use flash THEN. I'm strange like that.
Wow, awesome. Canon finally stepped back and did a really major, fundamental upgrade it sounds like. Looks like I won't be able to afford one until around the end of the year, but this will make getting another MKII very easy.
Sam Bennett wrote:
Has it already been answered if the new battery is backward/forward compatible with the current battery system?
its li-on isnt it? so i guess no then
Yeah, that's what I figured. After seeing the battery finally it seems pretty clear no attempt is being made. C'est la vie, but it's a bummer for those of us who can't afford to upgrade all our stuff at once. Not a showstopper by any means though.
aaronlam wrote:
...........................
I think this camera might suffer (or profit depending on how you look at it) in the same way as the 20D -> 5D move. The 5D was SUCH an improvement over the 20D that people who moved to the 5D were awestruck at its abilities. The 1DII was an AMAZING body... leaps and bounds beyond the 1D. The 1DIII builds on this and adds lots of "nice" features but at the same price point, I don't see anything terribly that interesting. I think what I was looking for was a 1V sized full frame 1-series. That would have been revolutionary in my book. All the other stuff is just features that photographers 50 years ago didn't need and photographers today don't need... but is nice. (Trust me, I am not someone who likes vintage items... I love technology). I just don't think this camera is that much to be AWED over. Oh well... I was seriously hoping to be knocked off my chair.
It's a performance camera that's success is defined by increasing the number of "keepers". That may be a very difficult shooting that produces an image good enough to print in a newspaper. Or a candid wedding shot in a very dark church that has adequate IQ and focus to make a large print.
We know the specs, but we don't know how well the sum of the parts exceed the 1DIIn.
Well, I've been holding off upgrading my 30D since October incase the MkII N was replaced. I shoot mainly motorsport and it's off-season so the wait has been okay (apart from my lack of patience...). Anyway, this MkIII has hit everything I could and wanted, and more. Now, where's that waiting list...?
Hrow wrote:
I suspect that you might see a bit more of a difference in real life. If not, that 3200 is preeeety damn good.
That's marketing material -- take it with a grain of salt. It almost looks like noise reduction routines have been applied in post-processing to the ISO 1600 and 3200 shots.
I'm just kidding... yes.. if MOST of your shots are over ISO1600 and you already have super fast glass... then any reduction of noise at the high ISO's would be invaluable and a killer feature.
