Im of the opinion that we will also be stunned by another announcement of the 1Ds II's succesor . The mk III is not a "do it all" and there is a huge gap for a camera with higher resolution , going into the MF territory.
A FF 25mpix camera with some of this ones features would be most desireable.
You can try www.thecamerastore.com based in Calgary, Canada.
No pricing/availability yet but they are taking names for order/wait list. I put myself on the list at around 6pm local time (about 19hrs after the announcement) via email and ended up 5th on the list. As you can see, this camera is going to be one hot seller.
Canadian prices just don't compare to US prices, (albeit not as bad as Australian prices). I am looking for somewhere in the USA. Thanks for the suggestion though!
khurram1 wrote:
as much as i hate nikon (only bcoz i got a lemon and the lousy treatment i received from Nikon Canada 15 years ago), I would be VERY surprised if they don't have something to challeng the 1DIII in the works. I think with the exception of the 5D, their newer offerings (D2X, D200, D80, D40) have had a much more WOW factor then Canon, mainly becasue they have come in at a much better price point then Canon.
The new 1DIII looks great, seems to have improved ergonomics. I really liked the new improved AF, the 3"LCD, dust cleaner, and supposed better/cleaner higher ISO performance.
but I would have liked to have seen more then just a 25% increase in MP. I would also have perferred to have seen a new 14-16mp Full frame camera that has a 1.3 crop mode at 10.2mp.
MOST OF ALL, i would have liked to have seen a DEDICATED MLU!!!! I'm hoping, that this will be in the 5D replacement....Show more →
The Nikon D3H will be a 10.xMP LBCAST sensor, with 10fps guaranteed. However, I bet it doesn't have live view or 14 bit capture or anywhere the noise performance of the 1D III. Still should be a much better camera than the D2H.
VanIsle wrote:
as I do not understand the ultimate technology...
shouldnt going from 12bit to 14bit (4000 to 16000 tonal transitions) significantly improve DR? Not sure how this would result in DR 'similar' to the 1D2 (assuming the OP has his facts straight)
To me moving to 14 bit capture effectively increases the DR, although tecnically the capture depth does not alter DR. Here's my reasoning:
With the 14 bit capture, there is 4x the tonal values. This makes a big difference in the shadow area. Lets' assume the 1D II N and 1D III have 8 stops of DR and see how they compare.
1D II: 4096 levels - linear capture
1: 2048
2: 1024
3: 512
4: 256
5: 128
6: 64
7: 32
8: 16
The lowest two stops have only relatively few tonal values. Shadow detail is weak and DR is not as good as the 8 stops would indicate.
1D III: 16384 levels - linear capture
1: 8192
2: 4096
3: 2048
4: 1024
5: 512
6: 256
7: 128
8: 64
You are now seeing that the darkest two stops actually contain a good number of tonal values allowing smooth tonal transitions and decent detail. In other words, if the 8th stop has so few tonal values that essentially there is no detail, then the true DR is actually smaller. It may technically record as 8 stops, but most would believe it's only 7 stops at best. Having 4x the tonal levels at the lowest stop means real detail and to me at least that's adding to true DR.
In fact you can see that you can push the 1D III to 10 stops and the darker stops are as good as the 1D II was at 8 stops.
Also the 14 bit capture is a blessing for things like blue skies where we usually have so few tonal gradations making it extremely difficult to do much with them in post processing without introducing posterization. This gives us more headroom. canon has even shown an example of this with a sunset shot.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
To me moving to 14 bit capture effectively increases the DR, although tecnically the capture depth does not alter DR. Here's my reasoning:
With the 14 bit capture, there is 4x the tonal values. This makes a big difference in the shadow area. Lets' assume the 1D II N and 1D III have 8 stops of DR and see how they compare.
1D II: 4096 levels - linear capture
1: 2048
2: 1024
3: 512
4: 256
5: 128
6: 64
7: 32
8: 16
The lowest two stops have only relatively few tonal values. Shadow detail is weak and DR is not as good as the 8 stops would indicate.
1D III: 16384 levels - linear capture
1: 8192
2: 4096
3: 2048
4: 1024
5: 512
6: 256
7: 128
8: 64
You are now seeing that the darkest two stops actually contain a good number of tonal values allowing smooth tonal transitions and decent detail. In other words, if the 8th stop has so few tonal values that essentially there is no detail, then the true DR is actually smaller. It may technically record as 8 stops, but most would believe it's only 7 stops at best. Having 4x the tonal levels at the lowest stop means real detail and to me at least that's adding to true DR.
In fact you can see that you can push the 1D III to 10 stops and the darker stops are as good as the 1D II was at 8 stops.
Also the 14 bit capture is a blessing for things like blue skies where we usually have so few tonal gradations making it extremely difficult to do much with them in post processing without introducing posterization. This gives us more headroom. canon has even shown an example of this with a sunset shot....Show more →
I agree, the 14-bit capture is significant. Canon has brought to maket a compelling product. Well done Canon!
> ...you guys may finally have a lens as good as our 17-35mm, and that's great news.
My 5D's already have a lens as good as the Nikkor 17-35. The Nikkor 17-35 :) Seriously, one thing that helped me switch to Canon was the facility to adapt pretty much any legacy lens, including Nikkor, Leica R, and even Zeiss AF. It's not just Canon's sensors that are causing people like me to switch; it is also the EOS mount. The Nikon mount is limited in width, depth and adaptability. If you need the Nikon bodies' better ergonomics, cool, but the 1D3 and 16-35II announcements suggest that Canon isn't going to be taking its foot off the gas. Can we expect the fabled 'exodus' to continue?
DmitriM: They'll sell a lot of these if they can put these all in a smaller package with some reduced functions(weather seal,etc)
Some people would like to have all the features of 1D mk III with FF sensor to boot for the price of Nikon 200 (to upgrade from 30D). I can constantly hear about this "trickling down effect" and "waiting for the prices to drop". It is becoming annoying.
khurram1 said: Canon should have either created a wider lens or another lens for the 1.3 sensor that can go wider then 21mm (that you get with the 16-35).
Just out of curiosity, if I may: what do you shoot that you absolutely need it wider than (an equivalent) of 20 mm (that is what you get with 1D)?
At events it can be helpful to provide a shot taking in as much of a venue as possible. Enter 17mm on a 5D. Interior and architecture photographers also welcome the width. Although I already have 1D3 envy I will probably wait for 5Dmk2.
I completely agree that Interior and architecture photographers might not need (want) 1d mkIII. I just think that anything wider that 20mm (FF) is very specialized photography. Interior and architecture photographers would need tilt/shift (lenses or LL cameras) anyway.
I just came from an event and the CPS stand had a couple of 1Dmk3 with them. We were not allowed to take images on own cards, but here's my experience.
The camera feels like always. Sturdy and familiar, only the lesser weight makes it feel like a 'feather'. Very nice feel to it.
It reacts quicker than the 1d2
The screen is just huge compared to my 1d2. It is very pleasing to look at.
The live view mode is eary if you'd ever need it. For my astro work it is very helpful to say the least.
The viewfinder is awesome. It feels like I look through an eos3, though it was inside, I feel it was brighter. I don't know how matte the screen is, but I loved it.
The coupling for the flash is much improved. The weather sealing works also to make it more sturdy imo. The flash itself is pure awesome. What I loved is the new connection. It is no longer a ring, but it is now a lever, like some quick release holders have. Easy to get the flash off, even with gloves. Also the battery compartment door is improved a lot. The looks, the sturdy feel, the weather sealing. Everybody will want one. I do for certain.
Odd is the buttons. It is an unfamiliar feel and when you will learn it you will love it, but it is unlike any other canon camera. Less double button options. The menu is different as well, compared to 1d2, and very easy to follow. AF on is nice. I am one of the people who use * to focus and half-sutter to lock the exposure. (I can not convince everybody, but this ROCKS.
I forgot to try the AF-point selection. Darn.
The highlight saving is adding a curve. I'm certain this has been discussed. I haven't had time to read this thread. The people didn't know from where this S curve would run. I opted, just in the highlights, or over the whole range? They could not tell me. My best guess would be just in the highlights above some arbitrary number, otherwise the whole image feel would chance. But I don't know yet. However, it is a very nice feature.
Be careful comparing the noise. The images are from pre-production samples. I told them I could not see that the noise on 3200 is the same as 1600 in the 1d2. They told me, that this could be true. It could be a bit better in the production models. I asked how, because I want to compare without NR and then it would be just the chip. And the chip would hardly change between pre and actual models. They claimed that the chip programming was still fine tuned after the pre-production models. I think this could have to do with exact gains. Also the NR s/w might have improved. If it is all rubbish, fact or noticeable I don't know. We shall see how the noise is in the actual models.
There's nothing I can say about optical quality of the new 16-35II. It feels like a great lens, like every L lens does when it is fresh. The 82mm filter size is a pain as I would need a new polarizer. Also the hood is an awkward thing to have in your bag again.
hike wrote:
My thoughts exactly. I had just about convinced myself this would be my next camera until I realized there's no wide angle solution. The Sigma 12-24 seems to lack sharpness and have significant CA (per Photozone), ...
The Sigma 12-24 is plenty sharp and pros who use it, like it a lot and get spectacular results from it. The front filter dilemma can actually be remedied with outboard filter rigs, or modification of the lens cap. Granted, a pain - but it can be done.
mfurman wrote:
Some people would like to have all the features of 1D mk III with FF sensor to boot for the price of Nikon 200 (to upgrade from 30D). I can constantly hear about this "trickling down effect" and "waiting for the prices to drop". It is becoming annoying.
For guys who don't have the cash sitting waiting be used it's a natural behaviour - I've been one of those guys with this view but I am beginning to realize that I think I have to change my tune. The 1D3 indeed has all the things I could wish for. Now I'll will have to see how far my my Canadian dollars will stretch... any word on Canadian pricing yet. The US prices seems to be going up from what I see in a few posts.
mfoto said; The 1D3 indeed has all the things I could wish for. Now I'll will have to see how far my my Canadian dollars will stretch... any word on Canadian pricing yet.
I pre-paid but they could not give me the price. What I was told was: "Between C$4500 and C$5000". 1D mk III is the camera I always wanted and I hope that I would use it much longer than any of my previous DSLRs (hopefully as long as my last film camera)
. They could've easily bring it up to 16MP. It's a professional camera. 10MPs is not enough these days.