JeanYves Ahern wrote:
Someone told here that the Mark III could possibly be over-passed by a new canon camera at 16mp in about 1 year.
Since all the ingredients are pretty new in the MarkIII( lots of them), is that make sense that thye could release a bigger box?
jean-yves
Depends what you want - as a sports camera the 1DIII will not be over-passed.
The new 1DsIII should come out around the fall though, which might have around 22MP, do if you want that sort of resolution then it will exceed the 1DIII for other than sports work, but it won't be cheap.
My guess though is that the 'someone' is referring to the 5D replacement, whenever it comes out ( perhaps next spring?). If it uses the same microlenses and so on as the 1DIII, it might have around 16MP - but of course the focussing and speed and so on will be much lower than the 1DIII.
So if you are looking for something that does what the 1DIII does, at around that sort of price, then there is no point in waiting - but if you really need a different camera, either of those two could fit the bill - really, if you look at what is out now, if the 1DII is better for you than the 1DsII or the 5D, then the model line up is not going to change, just upgraded models in each slot.
Regards,
DaveMart
According to a news item on Rob Galbraith's site, the just-released v3.7.7 of Capture One includes Phase One's "first crack at supporting CR2s from the Canon EOS-1D Mark III."
Nill Toulme wrote:
According to a news item on Rob Galbraith's site, the just-released v3.7.7 of Capture One includes Phase One's "first crack at supporting CR2s from the Canon EOS-1D Mark III."
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
I just downloaded 3.7.7 of C1 LE. While he release notes don't mention the 1dmkIII, I do notice there is now a color profile for the 1dMkIII.
Nill Toulme wrote:
As I understand it, they can't legally dictate what price the reseller actually sells for, but they can restrict what price it's advertised for. You used to see lots of references to "Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price" or MSRP. Now you more often see "Minimum Advertised Price" or MAP. Then again you'll sometimes see references to "street price," which is what the item is actually selling or expected to sell for.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
I'm not sure if its apples vs. oranges, but Microsoft has done a pretty good job of getting legitimate dealers to not discount there operating systems for quite a while... CompUSA puts nearly everything on sale, but never has really discounted Windows XP, and I see the same thing going on with Vista. May be different with software though.
Adobe's "standard" RAW format. Their intent was to get all manufacturers to move to one RAW format instead of each having their own, but thus far it hasn't been embraced by the camera makers.
convergent wrote:
I'm not sure if its apples vs. oranges, but Microsoft has done a pretty good job of getting legitimate dealers to not discount there operating systems for quite a while... CompUSA puts nearly everything on sale, but never has really discounted Windows XP, and I see the same thing going on with Vista. May be different with software though.
In the US, a minimum selling price can be contractually enforced legally. This has been true for maybe 15-20 years. I believe Canon only requires a MAP at times.
dcmiller wrote:
In the US, a minimum selling price can be contractually enforced legally. This has been true for maybe 15-20 years. I believe Canon only requires a MAP at times.
Hmm... Can you give some data on this? I'm pretty sure H.R.6971 took care of this back in 1975 (U.S. only, of course).
Look up:
H.R.6971
Miller-Tydings Act
fair trade act
fair trade law
Edit: I Believe MAP may also contain "price maintenance" clauses in some countries, but not in the U.S.
jray wrote:
Hmm... Can you give some data on this? I'm pretty sure H.R.6971 took care of this back in 1975 (U.S. only, of course).
Look up:
H.R.6971
Miller-Tydings Act
fair trade act
fair trade law
Edit: I Believe MAP may also contain "price maintenance" clauses in some countries, but not in the U.S.
You're right, I was thinking of MAP. I guess the FTC can even rule against map in certain cases.
A good reason to always ask if a lower price is available.
I will not be a fan of DNG until Adobe makes it public domain. Anyone would be naive to think that Adobe is promoting DNG just for the benefit of the public. It may be free now, but who knows what Adobe may decide to do once it became the industry standard. Will they drive the cost of other software up by charging higher and higher user fees? Will they crowd out the competition by controlling DNG access. Will they drive the cost of cameras up doing the same to hardware manufacturers. I have visions of Microsoft. There are good reasons why most of the big hardware manufacturers have not adopted DNG.
Mickey wrote:
I will not be a fan of DNG until Adobe makes it public domain. Anyone would be naive to think that Adobe is promoting DNG just for the benefit of the public. It may be free now, but who knows what Adobe may decide to do once it became the industry standard. Will they drive the cost of other software up by charging higher and higher user fees? Will they crowd out the competition by controlling DNG access. Will they drive the cost of cameras up doing the same to hardware manufacturers. I have visions of Microsoft. There are good reasons why most of the big hardware manufacturers have not adopted DNG....Show more →
Subject to the terms below and solely to permit the reading and writing of image files that comply with the DNG Specification, Adobe hereby grants all individuals and organizations the worldwide, royalty-free, non-transferable, non-exclusive right under all Essential Claims to make, have made, use, sell, import and distribute Compliant Implementations.
Complete text at above link
Adobe was also the developer of the tif format and the PDF format and have not done as you speculate with those formats. Your concerns are not well founded.
