The people that are disappointed are those that thought the 5D was going to transform into a 3D. But realistically, that was never going to happen. It is still a 5D, just updated to all the latest features. It still serves the original market very well. It is a great studio, landscape and wedding camera. It was never meant to be a great sports or wildlife camera. The 3D will take care of that if and when it ever appears. But I don't expect that to happen anytime soon, certainly not this year anyway.

5D (and 5DII) is NOT a great wedding camera if you do a photojurnalistic approach to weddings and work with available light on top of that. In such a case, you would use large apertures and thus the focus-recompose technique does not work well and if you try to take action shots of people dancing or so, the 5D AF is a PITA. For me the 5D is a one-point AF Camera (and that is in the center). The outer points would not even focus in low light (and I use only 2.8 or faster aperture lenses).

So for me, as the 5D II is a bit of dissapointment, another 3D/7D camera with better AF and the same form-factor, without video and stupid print button would be something really exciting.

I simply can't regard the 5d2 as an anemic upgrade. It may not have all we wish for, but overal I think that it is a pretty significant upgrade. Time will tell if it really is.

The pricing, although very aggressive, hardly makes it a consumer upgrade as the OP suggests.

But I do agree that the initial pricing and old AF-system might suggest that Canon has a surprise up its sleeve.

To put things in perspective, I'd LOVE to have the new 5D2, but I'll be damned if I not wait 6 months before going out and buying one.

OTOH, I really want a new 300/2.8, which will demand a serious investment

Ruy

Nate Greuel wrote:
there just isn't much of a market for this kind of camera. knock canon all you want, but most people that are going to spend this kind of money on a camera are pros that will spend the extra on a 1d series

I'd love a D series or semi D series camera that was full frame and would work as a backup. What pro wants to spend $16K on a camera and a backup. This is what the 3D would be. Same build quality & shutter live, no built-in grip, fewer AF points, not as many fps, .75 the number of mpxls, same battery & access, etc. Every pro out there who wasn't going to lay out for 2X Ds would buy the camera. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

WShotton wrote:
The people that are disappointed are those that thought the 5D was going to transform into a 3D. But realistically, that was never going to happen. It is still a 5D, just updated to all the latest features. It still serves the original market very well. It is a great studio, landscape and wedding camera. It was never meant to be a great sports or wildlife camera. The 3D will take care of that if and when it ever appears. But I don't expect that to happen anytime soon, certainly not this year anyway.



If you're correct Photokina is going to be pretty anti-climatic.

It's amazing how many problems and concerns Canon users have..

Sometimes I wonder, "when will you all take all your babbeling BS and make it into pictures instead of all this constant whining"... ?

calvillo wrote:
Nate Greuel wrote:
there just isn't much of a market for this kind of camera. knock canon all you want, but most people that are going to spend this kind of money on a camera are pros that will spend the extra on a 1d series

I'd love a D series or semi D series camera that was full frame and would work as a backup. What pro wants to spend $16K on a camera and a backup. This is what the 3D would be. Same build quality & shutter live, no built-in grip, fewer AF points, not as many fps, .75 the number of mpxls, same battery & access, etc. Every pro out there who wasn't going to lay out for 2X Ds would buy the camera. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.


That's exactly what I'm talking about. -And this same camera would be considered a serious step-up for the current 5D owners, MANY of whom are not going to buy the 5DII.

Let's see, how much was the original 5D when it came out? Over $3k, street price.

That's at least $3200 - $3300 in 2008 dollars. Sold pretty well, too.

With recent cash back deals it's been possible to buy a 5D in a mainstream shop for £1149. The MKII is £2299. I'd say Canon could rock with something like the MKII but with 12-16MP, maybe ditching stuff like video, priced near the 1149/1299 the 5D has been selling for recently.

The 1Ds is not bought by default by pros. I'm an editor on a business magazine and I had some freelance files arrive on a D100 just this week from a well-known press photographer. In the film days, a jobbing pro could spend £800 or less on a pro camera, which is why the 20D is/was a fairly popular pro camera - it came in at around traditional fim price points.

The camera you describe exists. It's called the 1D mark III, and it's available for only a few hundred more than your asking price. Not too bad.

I myself would love to have a 1DsIII body with a FF sensor @10-12 mp w/iso up to 6400 and big improvements in DR plus 4fps. I'd pay $5grand for that in a heart beat!!!!!!

Hi,

To the OP, I think this thread got off the track with the very negative tone directed toward 5D and 5D MKII users, but according to your profile you have a 5D and I know from frequenting the alternative forum that you have a fair bit of alternative manual focus glass, so perhaps you got a bit carried away. For you personally the 5D MKII could be a very nice camera and ought to be terrific when using manual focus glass and I doubt you think of yourself as just a Rebel user (another point in which you were unnecessarily derisive--many of us started off as Rebel users and there are some really good photographer that still are).

Now back to the point of the thread which was speculation on a 3D. I don't expect a 3D exactly, but I wouldn't be surprised if Canon changed their lineup of professional 1D series cameras. It seems likely to me that when Canon replaces the 1D3 they will no longer make a pro crop camera, but go full frame. If they make 2 full frame pro cameras, then how will they differentiate them? I would assume there will still be one higher speed, lower resolution camera and one higher resolution lower speed camera. One other way they may differentiate the two camera is to make one a smaller form factor like the 1V. So one intriguing possibility is that when they replace the 1D3, they may make this a full frame camera with a small form factor and high speed with a bit lower resolution. It might even be smart to change the naming convention as they have damaged the 1D label a bit and a 1D MK IV would bring back memories of a 1D MkIII, so let's say they name it a 1Dv, and let's say it shoots at 10 fps and has a 21.1 megapixel full frame sensor (which ought to be possible with dual Digic IV chips), and they fix the pro autofocus, and add the new features developed since the 1D MKIII. Now that would be a camera not too far from what people want in a 3D and they could price this at about $4,000 or so or the typical price for the 1D models. Then they could still have the higher resolution, lower speed full size model and maybe this would come down in price a little to $7000 or so, but basically they could maintain their price structure. To me this seems like a reasonable way for Canon to go with their pro line.

Jman13 wrote:
The camera you describe exists. It's called the 1D mark III, and it's available for only a few hundred more than your asking price. Not too bad.

True, the 1D mark III is a great camera, and in the right price bracket, but it's not the camera I described. It's still a 1.3 crop, designed expressly for sports. I'm absolutely committed to full frame.

A FF version of the 1D mark III is not what I envision (though it's what I personally want) as I think Canon needs to keep the battery grip as a separate option. There are a lot of people who want to keep it lightweight.

Steve Spencer wrote:
Hi,

To the OP, I think this thread got off the track with the very negative tone directed toward 5D and 5D MKII users, but according to your profile you have a 5D and I know from frequenting the alternative forum that you have a fair bit of alternative manual focus glass, so perhaps you got a bit carried away.

I never denigrated either 5D owners (I am one) nor Rebel owners. That was just the idiots that posted immediately after my OP. What's offensive about noting the absolute fact that the vast majority of 5D owners who have posted about this, have said they don't plan on upgrading to the 5DII? And what's negative about saying, correctly for the most part, that this camera has been marketed at Rebel owners, who might be able to spend a little more than for the 50D?

Just how much do we have to walk on tiptoes around here to have a discussion?

Hmmm... full frame 1d3? Oh yes, that's right, the 1ds3...

I'm sorry...there needs to be a reality check here. Canon can't design a camera made for every individual.

Canon has:

A great lineup of consumer grade SLRs in the Rebel series
A high image quality, relatively high FPS, high MP prosumer 1.6x body in the 50D.
An extremely high image quality full frame, small form factor body with weathersealing, HD video, but prosumer AF.
A very high image quality pro sports camera with great high ISO, pro AF, weathersealing, 1.3x
And an extremely high image quality full frame, pro form factor body with pro AF, weather sealing.

And people are complaining because there aren't all sorts of bodies in between these. There's already a huge selection of bodies to choose from, and one that caters to nearly every need.

Canon is a business. Releasing another camera to fit between the 5DII and the 1DIII, and another to fit between the 1DIII and the 1DsIII would result in deminished returns...lots more R&D cost, lots more cost in production (due to multiple models), and likely decreased profit because they'll sell the same amount of cameras...just divided between 3 models instead of 1.

orangefirefish wrote:
Hmmm... full frame 1d3? Oh yes, that's right, the 1ds3...

Yeah, I know! I thought about that. It's the same as asking for a 1Ds II with a modern sensor.

-But remember, what models Canon brings out is not dictated by the engineers, it's dictated by the marketing guys. That is an absolute fact. -And it's just nuts for them to have a gap in their lineup between $2700 and $8K.

They almost HAVE to go after the D700. A lot of people, who are considering upgrading from something like a Rebel or 40D, have not yet invested heavily in lenses. Therefore, they could reasonably decide to switch to Nikon.

Maybe Canon is thinking that the added, "sort of" video will be enough. Maybe they're right.

Jman13 wrote:
I'm sorry...there needs to be a reality check here. Canon can't design a camera made for every individual.

Canon has:

A great lineup of consumer grade SLRs in the Rebel series
A high image quality, relatively high FPS, high MP prosumer 1.6x body in the 50D.
An extremely high image quality full frame, small form factor body with weathersealing, HD video, but prosumer AF.
A very high image quality pro sports camera with great high ISO, pro AF, weathersealing, 1.3x
And an extremely high image quality full frame, pro form factor body with pro AF, weather sealing.

And people are complaining because there aren't all sorts of bodies in between these. There's already a huge selection of bodies to choose from, and one that caters to nearly every need.

Canon is a business. Releasing another camera to fit between the 5DII and the 1DIII, and another to fit between the 1DIII and the 1DsIII would result in deminished returns...lots more R&D cost, lots more cost in production (due to multiple models), and likely decreased profit because they'll sell the same amount of cameras...just divided between 3 models instead of 1.

You would make a wonderful spin doctor for Canon.

Just curious where you have found demands for a camera between the 1D III and 1Ds III - you have pulled that one out of thin air. As for a camera between the 5D II and 1D III your memory is very short. Back when there was just a 10D and 1D and then 20D and 1D II, people were asking for a camera to bridge the $3000 gap; they wanted something better built, with better AF yet without having to carry around a 1.5kg tank. Why is that unreasonable?

I would call a full frame body with 16 MP with high FPS and pro AF a camera between the 1DIII and 1DsIII.

And it's not necessarily unreasonable, it just doesn't fit well into the Canon lineup.

I'm not saying you have to love the 5DII. Just that people expect Canon to listen because they're speaking. The only way Canon is going to change what they do is if people leave and they lose profit. Like any company, Canon wants to make money. Their strategy has worked very well for them in the past, so why change it? If enough people leave for Nikon, they'll reconsider, but there is a huge group of people who want image quality above all else, and have been satisfied with 9 point AF.

How many people really need a camera like you describe. The areas that truly need exceptional 45 point AF are sports shooters and action shooters, and they would probably be best served by the 1DIII. The 5D and 5D II are really intended for landscape / architecture / portrait photographers who need maximum detail and don't usually shoot extremely tough AF situations. For those who really need both, there's the 1DsIII.

Heck, half my shooting is done manually focusing anymore, so I guess that's why I don't mind the specs on the 5DII.

While I think the D700 is a good camera, I think Nikon was really stupid from a business standpoint with it. Why would anyone buy the D3? Honestly...I can't see any reason whatsoever to buy that camera. Spend $2000 for an extra 3 fps?

According to Chuck Westfall of Canon USA, the AF system of 5DII remains the same as that of 5D because they feel it is good enough. There are a few hidden AF points around the center, and they claim that that's enough for tracking a moving object near the center.

To me this argument doesn't seem to make sense. 5D is for landscape and portraits. People are not interested in tracking moving objects. But they are expecting all the AF points, not just the center one, to be more precise, and to spread more evenly across the viewfinder.

The video mode produces high definition movies, interesting indeed. But since this is experimental, Canon should have used the rebel rather then the 5D to experiment, as the OP pointed out. By the way, if the video mode is so exciting, why not put it into the more expensive 1Ds III? Just wait and see what happens when the 1D(s) IV comes out. If there is no video mode in it, then obviously the 5D is just a cheap guinea pig in Canon's eyes.

It's a good thing Canon's got guys like Cableaddict out here to help them figure out what their product line should look like. While you've got Canon on the line, Cableaddict, why don't you get them to drop the direct print button and implement a sensible mirror lock up? Because it's clear they're listening.

Or, here's a thought: There's already a camera that fits the bill. It's called the D700. If you really want to get Canon's attention, and convince them they ought to make one that suits you, the best way to do it is to buy their competitor's product. That's going to have a far more tangible effect than whining on forums.

In the last 6 months I saw all kind of opinions saying that the new 5DMK2 should have "weather sealing",more MP,AF microadjustment,a decent LCD,more fps,a much higher ISO values(at least the same like D3/D700),etc.AND HERE IT IS!!! THE new 5DII offer that and more and will all that I'm surprised to see some people saying that they want "x",or they want "y".THE ONLY THING that 5DII doesn't have is an AF sistem with more points. Come on,people, 9cross-type points it's more than enouth,especially if it works really good,being "driven" by the DIGIC4 processor.So wait to the first tests and talk after,you don't need 51AF points,good lord,be reasonable,you guys!!!!!!!

gabimaster wrote:
In the last 6 months I saw all kind of opinions saying that the new 5DMK2 should have "weather sealing",more MP,AF microadjustment,a decent LCD,more fps,a much higher ISO values(at least the same like D3/D700),etc.AND HERE IT IS!!! THE new 5DII offer that and more and will all that I'm surprised to see some people saying that they want "x",or they want "y".THE ONLY THING that 5DII doesn't have is an AF sistem with more points. Come on,people, 9cross-type points it's more than enouth,especially if it works really good,being "driven" by the DIGIC4 processor.So wait to the first tests and talk after,you don't need 51AF points,good lord,be reasonable,you guys!!!!!!!

you dont "need" 51 points, but I can definatly see the "need" for a fast-tracking/locking auto-focus. If it takes 5 seconds to acquire focus on a still object, its practically useless.

BenV-if you shoot action sports and birds,you should buy 1DMK3 now,when the AF problems are finally gone(lately I could't see anyone complaining anymore about 1dMK3) and I saw a test on a site ("photographyhouse","photographyhome" or somthing-I don't remember well the name)between NIKON D3 and Canon 1DMK3 on a fast object tracking test;guess what,1DMK3 is a lot better(with all the problem that made it famous).But it will cost you 4000$(if you are living in US,now I see you are).My opinion-it's worth it for sure,MK3 now is a very reliable camera.

I got this from

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2008/09/20/something-very-interesting-is-comingboth-to-this-blog-and-to-our-industry/#comment-866

If you look at one of his responses, he mentioned "Big brother" if this camera. Was he referring to a new camera or new 1D series ?. It seems to me a new camera other than 1D series.

BenV-one more thing(don't get me wrong,man):I saw that you are registered in 1.01.2008 and you already have 1974 posts;how do you find some more time to go outside to shoot if you spend so much time on this forum? I own a 5D(the original one) and 2*30D and a lot of Canon "L" lens(I shoot most of the time weddings) and I am very happy with the AF sistem;a friend of mine(that is also a wedding photographer) has a NIKON D300+17-55 f/2.8(that is a good lens) and believe me,the IQ of my 30Ds(released in march 2006) looks a lot better than his pictures.About 5D ,it's pointless to compare it with D300,it make no sense,5D +24-105L is FANTASTIC!!! And you should see what can do 135 f/2.0 L on 5D. CAN YOU TELL ME WHICH LENS from Nikon can compare with that??!!!!