So please explain to me with the advancements in processor technology why a autofocus system introduced (to digital bodies) in 2001 cannot be integrated with a modern camera (of any size).
EB-1 wrote:
The main thing is that the name 5D MK II is terrible. Canon should revamp their numbering system to follow a logical sequence or at least use less digits.
So please explain to me with the advancements in processor technology why a autofocus system introduced (to digital bodies) in 2001 cannot be integrated with a modern camera (of any size).
Because Canon is in the business of distinguishing between bodies by withholding features.
ward1066 wrote:
sounds like your wishing for a 1ds3
You are right, but I want one for, lets say, $3,500 More seriously though, I do believe Canon will add 1-Series (or at least close to) features to the updated 5D, but (once again depending on MSRP) I also believe they will neglect to add a certain feature(s) which will differentiate it between a 1-Series body...what that will be is unknown but if I had to guess I'd think they'd skimp a bit on MP's, BQ (no weather sealing) and AF (which IMO will be upgraded in one way, shape or form). A perfect example of this can be seen when comparing the recent 450D to the 40D. The 450D is now larger (in comparison to the 400D), shares many 40D features (live view w/ 3in screen, digic III, dust removal etc etc), and most importantly has an upgraded AF system and high(er) ISO performance, BUT Canon being the company they are, went and switched the media type to SD, which we all know is a consumer based media type...surely nothing professionals are highly interested in (if at all). Is SD a negative feature? To the average consumer, no...it's much cheaper than CF, so thats good, right? I can't speak for others but I can say that it is a turn off for me, along with physical size+ergonomics, BQ and a few other small quirks... enough so to make a different choice when it comes to picking up a back-up body. And so I spend more to get more. I believe the same deal can be applied to the 5D successor vs. a 1-Series body. What the deciding factors will be is obviously unknown...but there is a very good chance you will see the 5DII as a mini 1DsMKIII...much like you see the 450D as a mini 40D. OTOH I could be completely wrong
Canon will never allow a new version of the 5D to compete with the more expensive (FF) 1Ds MKIII unless they know in advance that they can trick-up that model even further. However, it is expected that they will add so-called improvements like live view, dust removal, and probably the same half-ass weather sealing like on the 40D. Every new feature at this point in the development of the perfect DSLR will be incremental. 5D owners don't want a heavier body, or need the fancy P&S tricks like touch-screens, and smile technology. I would settle for a flash sync speed of 1/250th second (up from 1/200th), but IMO Canon purposely withheld that "feature" found on lesser cameras so they could add it to the next version. They are running out of goodies, and those owners waiting for the successor to the 5D are running out of excuses to just be content with what they've got.
If they want to compete with the MFDB crowd Canon should get the 1/500th or greater sync thing going on. I know its hard to do with a focal plane shutter but didn't they have the ability to do it a while back with older cameras?
p.2 #10 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
Sad. You left a better VF off your poll. It's like the people that spend all their money on a video card for their PC and then go cheap on the display.
Doesn't make sense to me, but most of the people alive today are beyond my comprehension.
p.2 #11 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
I know I've passed up on a lot of 1dIII's and dsII's in the 3300-3600 range during the last 6 months and I personally do not think a new 5d at $2100 is a good deal right now. If canon wants to sell a new version of the 5d they had better put a lot of really nice stuff in it or keep the price at 2k. However, if they add another $100 in parts they could charge another 1k easy.
p.2 #12 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
How many 5d's do we know of that have packed up due to poor weather sealing?
If you're a national geographic photographer going to the extremes of the earth i could see why one may need it and even then not for most shooting.
p.2 #13 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
jamesf99 wrote:
Sad. You left a better VF off your poll. It's like the people that spend all their money on a video card for their PC and then go cheap on the display.
Doesn't make sense to me, but most of the people alive today are beyond my comprehension.
Yea...that is pretty sad. Damn now the whole poll is useless
FWIW I have no qualms with the 5D VF as it is now...and since others have not mentioned it, until you of course, I would tend to think it is not a top priority among most...
p.2 #15 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
John Power wrote:
I had a problem with the 5D viewfinder. Anytime there was any amount of light I could not read the information.
Would it be the #1 thing you would upgrade? 2nd or 3rd for that matter? Anyhow like I stated in the initial post, the options were based directly from your thread...what I saw was posted, VF never even crossed my mind...I'm content with mine
p.2 #18 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
I crave ECF on my 5D in a bad way. The joy stick thingie suks.
Yes, the VF data display is a little dim 'm small compared to my 40D, but I can read without too much trouble. Usually it's a distraction and I'd rather have a larger VF over a big bright data display. After all, I rarely forget the settings I dialed in...
p.2 #19 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
Thinking about the niche the 5D fits best, if I were to buy one it would be as a cheaper version of the 1Ds series.
In my case I'd use it mostly for landscapes with maybe some portraits / people shots. So I voted for 14 bit Digic III with more MP for even better detail. The Digic III will be there in any case as will the 14 bit, so I should be satisfied - the MPs don't matter so much as I wouldn't be cropping much and don't need to print billboards or full page magazine spreads
If I were looking for faster frame rate and better AF speed than the 40D I'd go straight to the 1D series, not the 5D. For shots where frame rate is important (to me), reach is also important - so I'd need at least the MkIII, though I'm more than happy with the 40D for birding and wildlife. I wouldn't be buying a 5D for its frame rate or AF speed. I'd assume the AF accuracy of the 5D would be perfectly fine for landscapes and portraits.
I wouldn't buy it without live view or sensor cleaning, either, having now experienced both. But the digic III and 14 bit would be the single most important feature for my use. Other things listed either aren't important or assumed to be included / adequate.
p.2 #20 · #1 Change/Improvement for 5DII: The Poll
M Vers wrote:
Yea...that is pretty sad. Damn now the whole poll is useless
FWIW I have no qualms with the 5D VF as it is now...and since others have not mentioned it, until you of course, I would tend to think it is not a top priority among most...
Well, since you put it that way I guess I agree with you and find it useless too
Glad you like the VF. Use a good one and you may not feel that way...
When you provide limited options, most will choose from what they have available, which is sad..
- And, you'd give up about a stop of low-light AF capability over the present 5D system (based on my own observation when I owned both bodies).
More seriously though, I do believe Canon will add 1-Series (or at least close to) features to the updated 5D, but (once again depending on MSRP) I also believe they will neglect to add a certain feature(s) which will differentiate it between a 1-Series body...what that will be is unknown but if I had to guess I'd think they'd skimp a bit on MP's, BQ (no weather sealing) and AF (which IMO will be upgraded in one way, shape or form). A perfect example of this can be seen when comparing the recent 450D to the 40D. The 450D is now larger (in comparison to the 400D), shares many 40D features (live view w/ 3in screen, digic III, dust removal etc etc), and most importantly has an upgraded AF system and high(er) ISO performance, BUT Canon being the company they are, went and switched the media type to SD, which we all know is a consumer based media type...surely nothing professionals are highly interested in (if at all). Is SD a negative feature? To the average consumer, no...it's much cheaper than CF, so thats good, right? I can't speak for others but I can say that it is a turn off for me, along with physical size+ergonomics, BQ and a few other small quirks... enough so to make a different choice when it comes to picking up a back-up body. And so I spend more to get more. I believe the same deal can be applied to the 5D successor vs. a 1-Series body. What the deciding factors will be is obviously unknown...but there is a very good chance you will see the 5DII as a mini 1DsMKIII...much like you see the 450D as a mini 40D. OTOH I could be completely wrong 