Beni wrote:
Because the 5D is a AI Servo camera right? Pathetic. Instead of making more than 1 focus point useable they pretend that 3.9 FPS makes AI Servo more important for what is a studio/wedding/landscape camera. What a bad excuse for not bothering.
It may be for a worse reason than that. It is more likely due to not wanting to rock the 1 series boat.
Understandable to a degree. But man, what to do now? Wait for the 1Ds4 in order to get the newer tech and have a decent AF system? (mk3 AF foibles notwithstanding)
As this little drama continues to play out year after year, Nikon wins more and more converts. And rightly so.
Because they have enough brain cells to realise that 21 megapixels is only needed for specialist applications and it's seriously diffraction limited anyway. If 12 megapixels is enough and it is for the vast majority of people then for £600 ($1200) less in the UK you can get a camera that really is everything to everybody including IQ!
I think you'll find plenty of 1DsIII owners who would beg to differ. But I guess they're all stupid.
For me, the advantage of a high res Camera is cropability. And it's a significant advantage in my opinion. I couldn't care less about AF. But I'm probably just stupid...
Ralph Conway wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
yeah, it does seem bizarre when for like $300 more they could've made it totally responsive and made people utterly forget about the D700 (and even the D800 would just be lucky ot match it at least a year later). So very bizarre to me.
Very bizarre? Your comment is.
There is really still somebody out there not already having Nikon gear or no gear, who thinks about D700 since it was outdated in IQ 3 weeks ago by 50D at the half price? D700 sales range wide below the expected numbers, I was told by my dealer.
This "shitty" not "weather sealed" camera with its "ashamed AF improofment" just set a new worldstandard in DSLRs.
Who still thinks about Nikon A700: Go to your dealer and buy one.
I shoot people and fashion. 4FPS are more than I need. AF was excellent before and did not need any change. Still it looks improved. 21MP and ISO 3200/6400 are the keywords. I never saw a Canon follow up offering lower IQ, than its prerelease. I guess its the same with 5D MK II (nice they kept the name and did not go with that rumor imaginations). Its again a milestone in photo gear. There is no competitor out there now.
And its not only best, but at a great price, too.
What the hell do all of you who remained unhappy expect?
That is no question and I do not need an answer. I know: fully weathersealed, 39 point AF, 7 frames per second and so on. What for?
Canon: It looks to me, you did an excellent job. Thank you. Show me some sample images please about ISO 3200/6400. If 3200 is in 5Ds 1600 IQ I will buy one about christmas. If ISO 6400 is about, I plan to buy a second one next year in Mai as a backup body.
Ralph
Ralph..... relax, take a nap and get the new 5D....
and give us a brake....
Justin D wrote:
I think you'll find plenty of 1DsIII owners who would beg to differ. But I guess they're all stupid.
For me, the advantage of a high res Camera is cropability. And it's a significant advantage in my opinion. I couldn't care less about AF. But I'm probably just stupid...
No, they are specialist users who need that much resolution and they know that they need the very best lenses to get it. If you handhold 21 megapixels you're already losing a chunk, if you stop down you lose a chunk. I wonder how many people upgraded to the MKIII for the megapixels alone and not the improved everything else.
dan9 wrote:
Why don't you go get the EOS3 specs yourself and make the comparison?
BTW, the 5DII has the EOS3 beat in almost all specifications (shutter rating, etc.) except the number of focus points. And, FWIW, the 5DII focus system is more sensitive to low light than the EOS 3 focus system, which was quite poor in low light.
People don't seem to remember, or simply are too lazy to look it up, that the EOS 3 was a plastic camera that shot 3 FPS (without adding a power booster.)
Yes, the EOS 3 could do multi-spot metering, though I very rarely used that. Having the exposure comp scale on the side was nice, though any liveview w/histogram has that beat hands down for getting a proper exposure.
what's wrong with you guys? it's obvious that canon will NOT release a FF body with high fps rate and improved af/iso features - this is where 1Ds series bodies with more MP, fps etc. come into the play!
Argh, aren't you reading the thread? Some dumbo has probably transcribed across 50D specs, which why originally the Canon websites said builtin flash and EF-S lens support.
are you guys crazy? people complain like "why doesnt canon give us NEW AF SYSTEM AND 5D QUALITY??! for a mid-pro range price?!?!" because then why would anyone buy the 1dsmkii or 1dsmkiii for 8 grand when for 2699 there is a way better camera? they cant give away their product.
Daan B wrote:
And I still don't see the point of putting over the top high ISO's on a landscape/studio cam. Maybe for weddings, but who needs 21MP for weddings.
Wow, cross type or no cross type... How on earth do we expect Canon to communicate in a clear and understandible way to us customers, when their internal communications are like this (pretty bad/confusing).
Some people suggested that Canon had a new management and that things would be different...
This communication thing and the same old strategy of putting a high end sensor in a 5/xxD body are pointing towards the opposite IMO
Note that the 5DII has a bigger viewfinder, better eye relief, AF sensitive to lower light (my EOS 3 always struggled with AF when light fell below about 5EV, while my 5D AF does quite fine in low light).
The 5DII is a well spec'd camera, by Canon standards. Frankly, all the whining in this forum says much more about the whiners than saying much about the 5DII. It is unlikely I will replace my 5D with a 5DII, but that says more about me than it does the 5DII, as I am getting back into doing film.
