Jeff wrote:
I'd say the Live Preview activated by a single button is about as close to answering everyone's prodding in regard to MLU as one might reasonably expect. As an added bonus, you can actually see what the heck is going on! Isn't that close enough to the mark?
Oh now I see. Hey I'd like to have that on my next camera.
DavidP wrote:
There's nothing to hate, and everything to love about this camera.
I'll say it again (since it'll be the first time in this thread ): Canon really LISTENED to photographers and IMPLEMENTED the changes that were requested.
Kudos to Canon!
This attitude change may be the best feature. The new 16-35 also bodes well for the future. Let's hope it is reflected in the rest of the line up.
I'll bet Canon's sales knew exactly what they were about when they produced less than 100% perfect demo pix: if you had $4k to blow on a camera with these specs, wouldn't you pick up the challenge?
O.K., now my dumb side (if not already exposed): what's sRAW and H 6400?
And I'd like to see a really low-light 3200/6400 ISO sample at 1.4 or 1.8 (maybe 1/45 sec)
sleepwalker33 wrote:
Not to be a troll or a hater, but I feel sorry for D2HS users. I can see why nobody shoots Nikon for Sports, the lack of as many IS lenses and bodies like this, make the choice very simple. It is a quantum leap forward in progress for lots of shooters not just an incremental upgrade like the 1dm2n was.
I'll assume this was a joke. Yes, your new camera is a leap forward. But 10MP and 10fps are not salient improvements for many sports shooters. What I like about a D2H is that I get 300 compressed RAW files to a 1GB card. The files are easy to process and the file quality and color out of Nikon Capture are amazing. Clients don't buy prints from me greater than 11X14, so the resolution is not an issue, though I do have choices (i.e., D2X).
Some of the new features in this 1D3 are great. Kudos to Canon. I would love to try one. However, I prefer the Nikon design, deadly accurate fill-flash, dedicated mirror-lock-up, the ability to use my wonderful and old manual focus lenses, etc. I also like the ability to use two bodies for sports, the D2H and the D2X. They're almost identical in design, except that I have 4MP, 7MP, and 12MP RAW choices at my fingertips. Nikon will improve the noise performance, again, in their next body, but Nikon noise has never been an issue for what I shoot.
I would love to have a Nikkor 200mm f/2 VR, or the 200-400 f/4 VR. I'm not exactly disappointed in the current selection of Nikkor lenses, believe me. The new Canon 16-35mm will hopefully be a great improvement over the previous version; you guys may finally have a lens as good as our 17-35mm, and that's great news.
drdrew wrote:
how do you get 16mm equivalent on this camera? the only thing i can come up with is the sigma 12-24. and the giant problem is it won't accept front filters. that is the ONLY thing keeping me away from jumping on board. and it's what kept me off the 1dMkII as well. i would really LOVE a 1 series body, but the 1DSmkII is too expensive and the 1DSMkI seems too outdated. sigh. if anyone has a mark II and is shooting ultrawide with it, i'd love to know how it's accomplished. canon should have made the new 16-35 a 12-24 instead.......Show more →
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 Canon 14 is expensive and has the same filter issue. And the flaring, and the easy-to-damage front element.
I suppose it was never intended for landscape, but it'd be my perfect camera if Canon made some equivalent of the 10-22 EF-S for the 1.3x sensor...
Anyone else notice page 63 of the white paper has had a noteworthy change?
This text:
"The retail price of the EOS-1D Mark III at introduction will be $3,999, the same price at which the EOS-1D Mark II N debuted."
has been changed to:
The retail price of the EOS-1D Mark III at introduction will be very similar to the price at which the EOS-1D Mark II N debuted"
The press release now reads:
Scheduled for initial U.S. shipments in Spring, the estimated selling price of the EOS-1D Mark III Digital SLR will be similar to that of its predecessor, the EOS-1D Mark II N Digital SLR.
i haven't gone through all of the specs yet in detail and just skimmed thorugh over the section on the live preview. is this available simply, or do you still need to go thorugh the custom menu selections?
Well I went to one of my dealers today to discuss pre-order of MKIII. He quoted me retail of $4,400.00. Seems like this is starting to look like a trend. C.J.
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 Canon 14 is expensive and has the same filter issue. And the flaring, and the easy-to-damage front element.
I suppose it was never intended for landscape, but it'd be my perfect camera if Canon made some equivalent of the 10-22 EF-S for the 1.3x sensor...
I totally agree on the 12-24mm. Which is why i'll probably be waiting for the 5D replacment. 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).
Sports photographers will buy the new camera in droves. The difference between 8.5 frames a second and 10 is huge, especially when shooting a sequence of an important play. Not to mention the new autofocus. I'm looking forward to the calibration feature that will make sure all my lenses are spot on in focus. This camera fully speaks to the flash, no more custom functions on the flash to set it, the camera will do it for you. I'm hoping the e-ttl algorithm is better than ettl-2. Already on the wait list for the camera. I want to be the first one on the block with MK3.
turnert wrote:
I'll assume this was a joke. Yes, your new camera is a leap forward. But 10MP and 10fps are not salient improvements for many sports shooters. What I like about a D2H is that I get 300 compressed RAW files to a 1GB card. The files are easy to process and the file quality and color out of Nikon Capture are amazing. Clients don't buy prints from me greater than 11X14, so the resolution is not an issue, though I do have choices (i.e., D2X).
Some of the new features in this 1D3 are great. Kudos to Canon. I would love to try one. However, I prefer the Nikon design, deadly accurate fill-flash, dedicated mirror-lock-up, the ability to use my wonderful and old manual focus lenses, etc. I also like the ability to use two bodies for sports, the D2H and the D2X. They're almost identical in design, except that I have 4MP, 7MP, and 12MP RAW choices at my fingertips. Nikon will improve the noise performance, again, in their next body, but Nikon noise has never been an issue for what I shoot.
I would love to have a Nikkor 200mm f/2 VR, or the 200-400 f/4 VR. I'm not exactly disappointed in the current selection of Nikkor lenses, believe me. The new Canon 16-35mm will hopefully be a great improvement over the previous version; you guys may finally have a lens as good as our 17-35mm, and that's great news.
10MP.. They could've easily bring it up to 16MP. It's a professional camera. 10MPs is not enough these days.
I'd love to see all of these features on a camera of lesser size. I need something I can haul with me. They'll sell a lot of these if they can put these all in a smaller package with some reduced functions(weather seal,etc)
limitdown wrote:
I remember some dealers were quoting over $3,500 on the 5D when it was first released. I can only imagine the kind of margins they were making. jerks.
Next time you have a piece of gear to sell we can expect you to sell it for less than its market price then? (Since you're not a 'jerk'?)
And, of course, since you consider MSRP to be magically ordained with Fairness, I expect you'd never, ever, buy a piece of gear below MSRP. ("No, Mr. Camera dealer, I will NOT take that gear at discounted prices--I will pay you MSRP--because that's fair!'.)
DmitriM wrote:
10MP.. They could've easily bring it up to 16MP. It's a professional camera. 10MPs is not enough these days.
I'd love to see all of these features on a camera of lesser size. I need something I can haul with me. They'll sell a lot of these if they can put these all in a smaller package with some reduced functions(weather seal,etc)
What's not enough about it? I shoot with a 4MP camera and it's fine for what I do.
): Canon really LISTENED to photographers and IMPLEMENTED the changes that were requested.
. They could've easily bring it up to 16MP. It's a professional camera. 10MPs is not enough these days.