evertdoorn wrote:
well the bar for AF has been raised; a new 5D will certainly have a system that's not as good as the X, but at maybe 7D level. That would be enough of an improvement for 95% of the users.
7D level? That's nowhere near "enough of an improvement." Why would Canon put an already-existing AF system from a lower-tier product into an upper-tier body? The 7D AF system is hobbyist-level stuff, not suitable for a high pixel count full frame sensor that is often used with fast-aperture primes.
No. Such suggestions are damaging if Canon thinks consumers will be happy with that. One f/2.8 point in the center does not make an adequate AF system for a 5D-series body. It will need peripheral f/2.8 AF sensors, something that the 1Ds-series bodies have had for ages now.
If the 1D X is the future flagship body designed for high DR, low noise, high ISO, moderate resolution, and high frame rate, then the 5D3 may need to be geared toward high resolution, medium DR, medium noise, and low frame rate, to satisfy the portrait and landscape shooters who don't need the hair-trigger responsiveness of the 1D X. But if that's the case, the 5D3 will also need an AF system that can function for fast-aperture primes, and won't be crippled with f/5.6 sensors. Because it's not an "action" body, it doesn't need 61 AF points. It only needs a few points with very high precision. And that's not what the 7D has.
I can't stand how people somehow think the 7D AF is the cat's ass. It's like some of you have never seen what a 1D-series AF system is capable of doing. If your idea of "good" AF is the 7D...then buy a 7D.