KiboOst wrote: Make it 1serie like (integrated grip), with real iso 12/25/50 and a slow mode (slow sensor reading/high DR) and I take it now ...

A studio camera does not need an integrated grip. An architecture camera does not need an integrated grip. A landscape camera does not need an integrated grip. If you want a grip for those purposes, attach an optional one.

Canon already makes a camera with an integrated grip for sports, photojournalism, and some wedding photographers.

+1. The grip for a high res model, studio, architecture, landscape etc. is underneath the camera. It's called tripod This for instance is a good studio camera, it's Dutch: http://www.shutterbug.com/content/cambos-ultima-35 Have EOSfun

Okay, so why would you want the 5D3 then at all, if you can get 40+MP, 6fps?
It seems silly to me.

Monito wrote:
KiboOst wrote: Make it 1serie like (integrated grip), with real iso 12/25/50 and a slow mode (slow sensor reading/high DR) and I take it now ...

A studio camera does not need an integrated grip. An architecture camera does not need an integrated grip. A landscape camera does not need an integrated grip. If you want a grip for those purposes, attach an optional one.

Canon already makes a camera with an integrated grip for sports, photojournalism, and some wedding photographers.


A studio camera doe NOT need 6fps, an architecture camera does NOT need 6 fps, a landscape camera does NOT need a 6 fps.
If you want frame rate, you buy the optional camera for that.

I do not know why most studio/advertising, landscape and architectural photographers would need 6fps.

So, Canon just give us 1 shot mode, ISO 25 please and inferior AF, and vertical and horizontal levels. Oh and no video also! You can even exit the shutter and aperture priority nonsense too along with all of the other rubbish modes on the camera. It is cheaper to buy a handheld meter than to pay for things you never use!

Ha...did not see your post Robert before my wish list.

Q3 announcement, meaning availability in 2014?

This is valuable input for someone considering the D800 in the mean time. 12-18 months of photography without being afraid of having to switch back to Canon

I'm not knocking it, I'm all for advancement. I am just confused by this. The processing power needed to push 6fps at 40+mp would have to be intense. The power consumption greater too (leading me to think it would either use a new battery or a 1 series size battery.

That and the buffer couldn't be that deep.

I can see the need for it, and I imagine there will come a time that MF meets 35mm format in resolution/detail.

MF tech would have to stand still for that to happen.

RobertLynn wrote: A studio camera doe NOT need 6fps, an architecture camera does NOT need 6 fps, a landscape camera does NOT need a 6 fps. If you want frame rate, you buy the optional camera for that.

Yes, precisely. I do hope Canon makes a highest image quality no-fps camera at a reasonable price (5D3 price or lower).

RobertLynn wrote:
Okay, so why would you want the 5D3 then at all, if you can get 40+MP, 6fps?
It seems silly to me.

Just catering to a different market at a different price point. I have to agree with another poster that when you hear the term "studio" being used you just know that Canon is not pricing this in the D800 range. This will be $8000 minimum and most likely pushing $10K.

Looks like Canon is trying to copy the conecpt of the Nikon D3x. Late to the party with high resolution, very little to offer over the competition, and at a too high price.

Rumors. Again. I mean, we've been hearing about a mythical megapixel monster for a year now.

We keep hearing rumors of megapixel monsters being tested "in the wild." Prototypes are out there! Bah. Until Canon sees fit to let me be a prototype tester, that does me zero good.

We heard people prognisticating "Wait until Photokina, Canon will have a D800 competitor." Photokina came and went, and we got a 6D instead.

After Photokina we kept hearing people say "Of course Canon can make a highmegapixel camera. They will definitely have one before the end of the year. There is no way they'll let 2012 end without having a D800 competitor." We have 47 days left in the year. Not looking so good.

As the year has moved along, the speculation has gone from "Canon will release a high megapixel camera" to "Canon will announce a high megapixel camera" to "Canon will make a development announcement about a high megapixel camera." Now the latest rumors are announcemnt in Q3 of 2013.

The only thing these rumors seem good for anymore is stimulating some entertaining discussion on these forums.

Speter wrote:
Why in the bloody heck will I need that many megapixels. I can't imagine all the hard drives I'll need.

In fairness, it looks like you are perfectly happy shooting 8MP camera bodies. That's fine, but some have moved on up the rez ladder. I love the 1D2 too, but it's not my main camera.

alundeb wrote:
Looks like Canon is trying to copy the conecpt of the Nikon D3x. Late to the party with high resolution, very little to offer over the competition, and at a too high price.


Good grief, that's a lot of conclusions to draw based on 0 facts.

I don't need more pixels. I need cleaner and sharper ones.

It's amazing how much all of you seem too know about things you know nothing about.

alundeb wrote:
Looks like Canon is trying to copy the conecpt of the Nikon D3x. Late to the party with high resolution, very little to offer over the competition, and at a too high price.

howard wrote:
Good grief, that's a lot of conclusions to draw based on 0 facts.


Conclusions? I am only commenting on how the content of the rumors look like when faced with the facts we have about the competition.

It is very funny to make a tongue-in-cheek comment in a rumor thread and watch all the people who get bent out of shape because this is not facts.

Jeffrey wrote:
I don't need more pixels. I need cleaner and sharper ones.

It's amazing how much all of you seem too know about things you know nothing about.

lol

I don't need "too know". I need "to know".

If you don't need more pixels then you don't need to worry about buying a camera which doesn't yet exist.

If you need a cleaner image, more pixels might actually help you because an image from a sensor downsampled to the size of an image which came from a sensor with fewer pixels may actually look cleaner.

If you need a sharper image, well, no pixels are going to help you there, you should get better lenses.

If you need a sharper image, well, no pixels are going to help you there, you should get better lenses.

... or better technique. There are more soft users than soft lenses. Better gear is the first thing tried by those who don't know what they are doing. (Thread participants excepted.)

eosfun wrote:
+1. The grip for a high res model, studio, architecture, landscape etc. is underneath the camera. It's called tripod This for instance is a good studio camera, it's Dutch: http://www.shutterbug.com/content/cambos-ultima-35 Have EOSfun

hopefully by calling it studio dedicated they simply mean no built-in grip and not it will thus be 15k or more or some weird crippling that despite the MP count and 6fps will be rendered unusable in some silly way for wildlife or sports or general shooting

the basic specs, the MP, low ISO, frame rate sound awesome (and you'd think they'd have to put in full 5D3 AF at least and make that the dumb thing that gives it the studio label)

RobertLynn wrote:
Okay, so why would you want the 5D3 then at all, if you can get 40+MP, 6fps?
It seems silly to me.

Because:

1. 5D3 is out now and this won't be out for at least 12 more months and with how Canon has been going maybe at least 18 more months, if not 20

2. it might cost say $5500 and not $3000