I am having hard time justifying the almost $1500 price difference. If I didn't have the MArk II, I would consider Mark III more seriously. Here is a comparison of two:
a few here show some better detail than the first ones
you can sharpen up the fall foliage over the lake and see some 1 pixel wide instant transitions from black to white to black
i'd still rather wish for a bit more noise and detail than less in super low contrast areas and deep shadows though
in terms of their in cams algorithms
many still look a mess though, Slovenia image, why is a low ISO, bright lit image, half covered in wax? It has such an awful bizarre overall look, even the sharp parts are a little blobby and haloed. Who designs the in cam jpg algorithms?
The detail in most of these samples is terrible. I'm going to assume its because they're either in-camera jpegs or just poorly processed RAWs.
Regardless, Canon needs to learn a thing or two from Nikon about image samples. Nikon always comes out with amazing samples for their new cameras. These are just not that great.
Well, from what I'm seeing the 5D3 is about 2 stops cleaner than the D800. I'm actually disappointed in the samples I saw from the D800, a lot of colour noise which usually isn't the case with Nikon. I'm floored by the images from the 5D3 though that I saw from DPReview. ISO25,600 looks almost as good as ISO 400. Granted there is some detail loss but that's to be expected.
I decided to cancel my pre-order. I was preparing a entry for my 5DMK2 to post in the Buy/Sell forum and started to think about how nice the MK3 was going to be. Then I realized many of the advantages did not apply to my type of shooting . So I am going to wait a while and see how things shape up.
skibum5 wrote:
... Slovenia image, why is a low ISO, bright lit image, half covered in wax? It has such an awful bizarre overall look, even the sharp parts are a little blobby and haloed...
The distant parts look like over sharpened air turbulence, the rest rather typical CGA (Canon Glass Aberration).
Hey, so I'm in a quandary here! I owned a 5D MKI, and now a 5D MK II, and own several Canon lenses: 24-105, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 70-200 f4 IS, the 1.4x extender, numerous filters etc. I really like my 5D II, having owned it since day 1 release.
That said, I'm eyeing the 5D MKIII, but I'm not even sure why. It just seems outrageously expensive, and the D800 is a VERY attractive proposition. I just fail to see why the MK III is so damn pricey, with so little *apparent* innovation....
Am I missing something? The 5D II was such a great improvement over the 5D I mainly because of the MP count, the easier-to-see LCD, and general snappiness of the unit. The MK III doesn't have any MP advantage, the video capabilities I'm not really interested in, and... the D800 is calling my name!
Truth be told, I'm not likely to dump all my lenses and jump on the Nikon bandwagon, but it would be nice if someone could give me a compelling reason to go MK III, aside from the AF, which honestly was never a problem for me with my MK I or MK II bodies...
Of course, you'll just all tell me to keep the MK II, but I just get the upgrade itch every so often...
William,
The biggest upgrade is the AF. If the AF isn't important to what you shoot then the price for the 5D3 is probably not worth it over you current 5D2. But for others like myself who were about to bite the bullet on the 1DX, the 5D3 has almost every single feature from the 1DX so in my mind the 5D3 is a bargin. If I had gone for the 1DX I would have reduced FPS to 7-8 as I don't need anything more than that. 6FPS is okay with me and I've been happy with the metering system in my 7D so I'm okay not having the newer 1DX system. I own 5D2 and 7D and the 7D's controls and menu system blows away the 5D2. So now I have all the FF goodness of the 5D2 with the customizability of the 7D plus the new AF system.
With that said there are also a lot of smaller changes in the 5D3 over the 5D2 that are important to me:
MFA at both ends of the zoom range.
Up to 7 bracketed exposures and +/-5EV.
Auto-ISO in M mode. (like 7D)
Multiple exposure stacking (not HDR but the other 1DX function)
New and better placement of DOF preview button (I've always hated this things position)
etc..
I just got my 5D2 in January, it has sold me on the benefits of FF so I've already preordered the 5D3. But everyone has different needs from a new camera.
William, do you really need a 36 megapixel camera? If you don't see/need a big improvement of the new AF, than you really should consider a medium format camera
Put that new 61-point AF system in a 7D and I will pay extra $1000 for the new 7D II. It will be better (minus 10fps) and cheaper than current 1DIV
Yep the AF is the biggest reason. There are definitely some upgrades, but boy does it sting at its intro cost. Crumbs...!
And kosin, do I really need a 36 megapixel camera? Sure I do! People said the same thing going from the 5D MKI's 12MP to the 21MP on the 5D MK II. And you can bet your behind I make use of the 21MP on the MK II. It's fantastic for giving you so, so much crop room, especially if you have the wrong lens on and you need to take a photo of that object miles away. 36MP sounds amazing, really. Now whether the sensor can really resolve that detail, THAT'S the question, so it will be interesting to see how the D800 is reviewed. But there's no question right now Nikon's new body is looking much more attractive than the Canon's.
We'll see when the reviews come out, but right now it appears to me that Canon sat on its laurels a little too long on the success of the 5D MKII and the MK III just doesn't appear to be as cutting edge as it should be in 2012. Now if it were priced at $2,799-$2,999, it'd be a lot more attractive. At $3,499 it's just madness - at THIS point. But again, maybe the reviews will tell a different story.
I ordered mine before 11:00AM eastern time last Friday from Amazon. Hopefully I'll get mine. I know others who placed orders with Adorama and B&H around 1 AM last Friday. They were waiting as was I, but I wasn't going to stay up that late.
I placed a preorder for the 5D3 and 2 of the new 600RT speed lights. If I can get good focused results that look as good as the raw images I have downloaded from the net then I will be switching all my gear over to Canon.
Key points for me are:
Ability to use flash with built in radio
Clean usable 6400 iso without banding present in 5D2
Larger file size allowing for more cropping (using 12mp Nikon now)
Dual card slots (I consider this important for wedding work)
Quiet mode that is quiet, my D3S in quiet mode is louder than a 5d2 in normal mode.
I have always prefered Canon skin tones.
Question about Wireless remote: From what I read it seemed you still had to get the transmitter that goes in the hotshoe. Did I miss something? Does the 5D III actually control the new 600ex without the transmitter accessory?
.
