Very nice feature just wish the LCD swiveled out or tilted or something so overhead shooting was easier...
[...]
I've read that more than once now. Well I guess it would be a nice feature to have a swivelling LCD, although it would certainly take more space, but I don't understand why this should be an advantage for overhead shooting for example, since I can't imagine how one could possibly get a shot on focus in MF mode holding the cam overhead
Remember, live preview only works on MF, logically, since the whole AF system sits behind the mirror...
Hammerli wrote:
So you actually need more than the current 5D delivers?
I realize it seems to be a popular refrain around here right now, but for many a body is the totality of the feature set instead of the totality of the MP count alone. There is very little difference between 10 and 12 MP; on the other hand, the disparity in nearly every other aspect between the 5D and 1DIII is overwhelming for me as an owner of both the 5D and a current 1 series.
Your point on the totality of the body is dead on and one that is being missed by many. The focus seems to be on MPs and FPS but in reality +/- 1 or 2 of either isn't a big deal for 95% of users.
mfurman wrote:
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.
Just because YOU don't need it, doesn't make it "specialized" photography!
Philippe Arnez wrote:
I've read that more than once now. Well I guess it would be a nice feature to have a swivelling LCD, although it would certainly take more space, but I don't understand why this should be an advantage for overhead shooting for example, since I can't imagine how one could possibly get a shot on focus in MF mode holding the cam overhead
Remember, live preview only works on MF, logically, since the whole AF system sits behind the mirror...
Another problem with the swiveling LCD is durability. Just look at the hinged LCDs on point and shoots, they are no where near as strong as what a 1 series body is designed to be. Even if you made the whole LCD housing with magnesium or aluminum, the hinge will still be the weakest part of the body and has a great potential of getting caught on things or being sheared right off the body by a blow or drop.
ga1lyons wrote:
...It is mainly focused on people who do sports and action photography...
I've got to respectfully disagree. 10fps makes this baby look like an action camera, but everything else in it makes it an all-around contender in just about any segment of DSLR-prone photography. About the only thing that camera doesn't (apparently) do is compete with the medium formats for huge print sizes.
The liveview focusing could stand macro photography on it's ear.
The 10fps is a candid and portrait photographer's dream. It's amazing how much an expression changes in a second.
Obviously, this is the hot goody for the sports crowd. And action crowd.
The 1.3 crop is going to be nice for the Nature Crowd too... No. It's not 1.6, but it's more reach than full frame.
I don't know about the Architect crowd... I guess the lack of a 10-22 type lens would be problematic, but other manufacturers offer zooms starting at 12mm, right?
And everyone above is going to benefit from the DR, 14bit, better focusing, etc...
Landscape shooters and city scape shooters may be the only group that I can readily think of that would and could trade in all of this camera's technology for more MP's.
If this camera performs the way we're all thinking it will, Canon's got a home run on their hands. Let's just hope that price stays somewhere around the $4K mark.
beewee wrote:
Another problem with the swiveling LCD is durability. Just look at the hinged LCDs on point and shoots, they are no where near as strong as what a 1 series body is designed to be. Even if you made the whole LCD housing with magnesium or aluminum, the hinge will still be the weakest part of the body and has a great potential of getting caught on things or being sheared right off the body by a blow or drop.
Not to mention the difficulty in providing durable weatherproofing around an articulating LCD panel.
sskoutas wrote:
I've got to respectfully disagree. 10fps makes this baby look like an action camera, but everything else in it makes it an all-around contender in just about any segment of DSLR-prone photography. About the only thing that camera doesn't (apparently) do is compete with the medium formats for huge print sizes.
The liveview focusing could stand macro photography on it's ear.
The 10fps is a candid and portrait photographer's dream. It's amazing how much an expression changes in a second.
Obviously, this is the hot goody for the sports crowd. And action crowd.
The 1.3 crop is going to be nice for the Nature Crowd too... No. It's not 1.6, but it's more reach than full frame.
I don't know about the Architect crowd... I guess the lack of a 10-22 type lens would be problematic, but other manufacturers offer zooms starting at 12mm, right?
And everyone above is going to benefit from the DR, 14bit, better focusing, etc...
Landscape shooters and city scape shooters may be the only group that I can readily think of that would and could trade in all of this camera's technology for more MP's.
If this camera performs the way we're all thinking it will, Canon's got a home run on their hands. Let's just hope that price stays somewhere around the $4K mark. ...Show more →
I totally agree with this. Shooting mainly landscapes and macros, even with the "meager" 10MP, I'm more than happy to trade off the extra MP for the overall package with 14bit encoding, extra dynamic range, high ISO performance and live view mode. To me, these are the real selling points.
sskoutas wrote:
The 1.3 crop is going to be nice for the Nature Crowd too... No. It's not 1.6, but it's more reach than full frame.
It is? I thought I read in the canon white paper that the pixel pitch is identical to 1DsII. If so, this camera is a simple crop compared to that. No magnification occurs as such. Mind you, this is still nice as I currently use my 1DsII for non action wildlife work due to its higher pixel density compared to 1DII. But there is no free lunch here, as there is with 30D.
I am going to get this camera but alas, I don't think it will work as well with my favorite lens, the 24-105 IS, as the 5D/1DsII do. With the full body, I rarely need something wider. With 1.3X, I will be forced to carry the 16-35 with me.
So the camera for me has wider range but does not quite cover a full frame sensor range. Which is probably what Canon wants so that we all get stuck buying multiple bodies .
I totally disagree with this statement. The 1DN is/was one of the fastest cameras in the world at 8.5fps, which is perfect for sports, but yet I always saw press photographers carrying it. The subjects that they shot were mainly CEO's and CFO's of companies, sitting pretty-darn still in front of reporters and analysts giving quarterly results presentations.
Not much action there, in terms of physical movement....
Landscape shooters and city scape shooters may be the only group that I can readily think of that would and could trade in all of this camera's technology for more MP's.
Thats me to a tee. I am eagerly awaiting the 1Dsmk3 so I can maybe pick up a cheap(er) mk2! 16mp would be enough for me.
Having said that I think the 1dm3 would make a fantastic all round camera - I have wished I had a weathersealed camera a couple of times in the past and the 1.3 crop factor i could live with in most cases.
Hrow wrote:
Your point on the totality of the body is dead on and one that is being missed by many. The focus seems to be on MPs and FPS but in reality +/- 1 or 2 of either isn't a big deal for 95% of users.
Quality of pixels is more important than number up to a point. It's apparent the 10.1MP of the 1D III are as good as technology will allow and seems like it'll easily give a 5D a run for it's money. In fact the 1D III will have lower noise and smoother tonal transitions.
It's like the old 1D, whose 4MP batted out of their league, and showed the same detail as a 6MP 10D.
amirm wrote:
It is? I thought I read in the canon white paper that the pixel pitch is identical to 1DsII. If so, this camera is a simple crop compared to that. No magnification occurs as such. Mind you, this is still nice as I currently use my 1DsII for non action wildlife work due to its higher pixel density compared to 1DII. But there is no free lunch here, as there is with 30D.
Yes, the 1D3's sensor is a crop compared to 1Ds2, but the 1D3 is
- cheaper (both as new)
- faster
- with higher ISO rating
so compared to 1Ds2, for all FL limited use there is free lunch in 1D3, namely lower price for equivalent pixel density in a 1D body. Speed and high ISO are extra bonuses.
After 1Ds3 has been introduced, this will change again. Either as a pixel density vs. speed & cost punishment, or if 1Ds3 has also a high speed crop mode, then it will likely best 1D3 in everything except affordability.
Steve wrote:
> The 1.3 crop is going to be nice for the Nature Crowd too... No. It's not 1.6, but it's more reach than full frame.
Cropping is only a reach benefit if the pixels are denser. Otherwise you're just cropping, with a corresponding reduction in picture resolution.
> I don't know about the Architect crowd... I guess the lack of a 10-22 type lens would be problematic, but other manufacturers offer zooms starting at 12mm, right?
It's not just about the limit of how wide you can go. The 1.3 crop means carrying heavier and more expensive glass than full frame if you ever need to shoot wide. Compare a 21 f2.8 and a 28 f2.8.
Landscape shooters and city scape shooters may be the only group that I can readily think of that would and could trade in all of this camera's technology for more MP's.
A full frame version of this exact sensor technology will outperform it in image quality. For that I hope. However, it looks like a great all-round camera that will deserve to sell by the crateful.
.