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.
I'm well aware that a full 21MP image is overkill for most purpose, probably including mine (actually, without doubt). However, as I stated, I think the gain for me is cropability. Basically the dream of having decent full frame and crop camera in one. Which is exactly what this represents to me.
I also trust Brainiac's numerous demonstrations on this and other forums that have convinced me that there is a significant leap in image quality from the 5D to the 1DsIII in terms other than simply enlargement. Enough for me to be interested in a camera that I can afford which will offer the same or better image quality with the added bonus of being a virtual crop camera (and everything in between) at the same time.
Frankly, I'm very glad that the camera doesn't have a whizzbang AF system and full weather sealing. I wouldn't be able to afford it if it did - the last (and, to date, only) camera that fit that description cost AU $10 000. This will cost ~$3000 depending on the dollar.
What I also know, as Canon seems to know, is that there are a lot of people like me.
Sergio Mottola wrote:
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.
You've been in a coma for 12 months apparently so we'll let you off lightly, but there's a little camera known as the D700 you might like to inspect.
krobatshov wrote:
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!
I'll combine my 40D with the 5d2 and have eosFun
Speaking of ESOfun... Where is he? He promised me something good
DThom wrote:
People were bashing this camera before it came out and now that it is out it is being bashed more. Nikon and Sony could be abolute junk or they could be 5DII killers. How about waiting for reviews with RAW files done by competent reviewers, before trashing any camera.
You will not find any 'competent reviewers'. Comparison is important, and all reviewers compare 100% crops from files at different magnifications, which is reliably unfair. You will need to do your own tests to discover how well this camera fares against D700 and α900. Be sure to uprez files to the same number of megapixels before comparing crops at 100%.
Justin D wrote:
Sounds like you need a 1dsMkII. Do people not understand that this camera is not intended to be everything to every body? It is exactly what the 5D was - a high res, slow landscape, non-intensive photo-journalism and portrait camera. And from the specs alone it should do well at all of those things. If that's not what you need, Nikon does offer a lower res, higher FPS/more AF points camera at a similar cost. Go get it. They don't offer a high res/low cost camera, Canon does. It's simply avoiding direct competition in every slot. And just as Canon hasn't filled the hole of a small format body with high fps/af points (they do offer a full size body), Nikon doesn't offer a high res body at all. And nobody's waving their little internet fists at Nikon, are they?...Show more →
I spent last weekend in the company of a 1DsMkII and yes, it is great machine. It's for sale as the guy has bought himself 1DsMkIII and I'm almost sold on it. However, I only shoot RAW and the buffer was forever catching up. A 1DsMkII with 6 or 7fps, improved low light performance and a pair of Digic 4's would suit me (and a lot of other people I think) down to ground. I know the megapixels and IQ are more than adequate for what I need. The guy only wants 1200 quid for it and it's in perfect nick with a low shutter count. I might just buy it to tide me over until the 1DMk4 arrives - we'll see what happens in Koln at the weekend.
As for changing to Nikon, I just can't justify the lens change. I have a 600/4, 400/2.8, 300/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 16-35/2.8 plus loads of other stuff. For better or worse, I'm with Canon and I'm not going anywhere. I just hope the 1DMk4 comes along sooner rather than later.
That is the huge problem, people keep saying "well, just change to nikon if you want weather sealing" or "just change to sony".. it is not that easy when you have lenses :P
Chrono1081 wrote:
Wow after reading through this forum and seeing everyone trash this camera it just makes me laugh. What the hell did you possibly want? A 1DsMark III with a $2700 price tag? I will be getting one of these.
Here, here!
You can certainly tell the photographers from the spec-nerds. All of the moaners here are clearly deluded in their expectations of what Canon was going to offer here. Want a 1DsIII? Go buy one if that is what you seek in a camera..simple. I think Canon now offers a camera body to suit every photographer's need. So if you want more than you can afford..work harder.
Personally, I have waited (and, yes, waited) for the 5D's replacement and the MkII will provide me (as far as I can tell reading the specs) with everything I require in a camera, and then some, for the money I want to spent. Had it not, I would have spent a bit more and got a 1 series body. Except for the flash-sync, the MkII has all features I had expected. This looks to be a near perfect blend of features for the price. I couldn't, realistically, have expected more. Some people, typically, expect far too much and, it would appear, won't ever be pleased regardless.
The 24mm f/1.4 II looks great and was needed as well. Here's hoping a 35mm f/1.4 II isn't too far away!
You can certainly tell the photographers from the spec-nerds. All of the moaners here are clearly deluded in their expectations of what Canon was going to offer here. Want a 1DsIII? Go buy one if that is what you seek in a camera..simple. I think Canon now offers a camera body to suit every photographer's need. So if you want more than you can afford..work harder.
Personally, I have waited (and, yes, waited) for the 5D's replacement and the MkII will provide me (as far as I can tell reading the specs) with everything I require in a camera, and then some, for the money I want to spent. Had it not, I would have spent a bit more and got a 1 series body. Except for the flash-sync, the MkII has all features I had expected. This looks to be a near perfect blend of features for the price. I couldn't, realistically, have expected more. Some people expect a far too much it would appear and will never be pleased.
The 24mm f/1.4 II looks great and was needed as well. Here's hoping a 35mm f/1.4 II isn't too far away!
As this little drama continues to play out year after year, Nikon wins more and more converts. And rightly so.
Year after year, like, when Nikon had such competitive cameras in 2005 and 2006, even 2007? Meh. I think the 'little drama' is watching people work themselves into hysterical tantruming consumers on the web (not directed at anyone in particular, just generally!) over a camera manufacturer which chooses to prioritise some aspects of photography over others in their 3rd tier camera body in order to cut costs and, yes, to maintain their investment in higher end technology. Part of teh reason this camera can be priced so competitively is the fact that 1DsIII users were effectively subsidising its development. And that is not bad, nor evil, nor even cynical - it is good business practice.
Man that looks stressful. I'd hate to stuff up THIS photo.
Beautiful result though and the crop looks great, I can see it on a few mantelpieces. This is a piece of history for that family right there, good job
Did you use an alt for this??
Its interesting what you're saying re megapixels, being predominantly a film guy I admit its one thing I cant say I fully understand the benefits of having more or less, especially when you throw in the mix the resolution of lenses and diffraction, and also the changing technology of sensors. For me only large prints will tell the truth, not online samples, but your posts do make sense in theory.
ulrikft wrote:
That is the huge problem, people keep saying "well, just change to nikon if you want weather sealing" or "just change to sony".. it is not that easy when you have lenses :P
So you define those with YOUR needs as the worthy, good people, those with other needs are lazy bums that should work harder or just shut up?
No...not at all. I wish I was that arrogant!
All I am saying is neither Canon, Nikon, etc. custom make cameras for a particular need and budget. Essentially, buy what serves you best, as a tool, or learn to use the tool you can best afford to your photographic advantage. But don't expect there to be a perfect camera. Starting with the Canon A1, then a T90, then a F1n, I have appreciated this fact. Work with what the camera you can afford provides you but, ultimately, rely on your photographic skills to get the result.
So you define those with YOUR needs as the worthy, good people, those with other needs are lazy bums that should work harder or just shut up?
I think he's suggesting that those with his needs are the people for whom this camera is designed. And that for people with the need of faster AF etc, there's the 1D series. If that's not absolutely perfect for you, but the D700 or whatever is, what are you waiting for?
You can certainly tell the photographers from the spec-nerds. All of the moaners here are clearly deluded in their expectations of what Canon was going to offer here. Want a 1DsIII? Go buy one if that is what you seek in a camera..simple. I think Canon now offers a camera body to suit every photographer's need. So if you want more than you can afford..work harder.
Personally, I have waited (and, yes, waited) for the 5D's replacement and the MkII will provide me (as far as I can tell reading the specs) with everything I require in a camera, and then some, for the money I want to spent. Had it not, I would have spent a bit more and got a 1 series body. Except for the flash-sync, the MkII has all features I had expected. This looks to be a near perfect blend of features for the price. I couldn't, realistically, have expected more. Some people, typically, expect far too much and, it would appear, won't ever be pleased regardless.
[]
I think he's suggesting that those with his needs are the people for whom this camera is designed. And that for people with the need of faster AF etc, there's the 1D series. If that's not absolutely perfect for you, but the D700 or whatever is, what are you waiting for?
im not sure if "to-crosstype or not" is that important, maybe that feature is overestimated. But marketing-wise it became important, maybe to some as importat as megapixels or lcd-resolution. So from that pov canon made a huge mistake putting an 3 year old unit into a camera thats surrounded by better-featured competitors ... i wonder how canon could fail to realise this ... theres much room between this unit and the 1ds-unit so canon could offer something in between ... i dont get it ...
Justin D wrote:
Year after year, like, when Nikon had such competitive cameras in 2005 and 2006, even 2007? Meh. I think the 'little drama' is watching people work themselves into hysterical tantruming consumers on the web (not directed at anyone in particular, just generally!) over a camera manufacturer which chooses to prioritise some aspects of photography over others in their 3rd tier camera body in order to cut costs and, yes, to maintain their investment in higher end technology. Part of teh reason this camera can be priced so competitively is the fact that 1DsIII users were effectively subsidising its development. And that is not bad, nor evil, nor even cynical - it is good business practice....Show more →
Well, you're right about the tantrums part. It doesn't do any of us any good to complain about inferior products because they are what they are. Nikon has a different philosophy and always had, at least in my lifetime. Canon's corner cutting never bothered me with film, or even the first 6 years or so that I used digital. The last 3 years of Canon digital have been a huge, emphasis on huge, series of disappointments, starting with the 5d and moving into the mark III cameras. The 5d is mediocre in all ways except IQ, and the 5d2 will maintain that tradition.
You're absolutely wrong about the 1Ds3 uses subsidizing everyone else. Canon's pricing structure puts it out of reach for most and they sell far more mediocre products (such as the 5d down). Canon has a crazy notion that no matter what they do it will sell, and I for one would like to help disabuse them of that notion..
Pixel Perfect wrote:
So am I correct in thinking real photographers are full of their self importance or is that just you. You are so far off the mark it's pathetic.
