ChrisDM wrote:
It sure is easy to separate the gear hobbyists from the real photographers around here... Canon's lineup now includes at least one of everything, except for a $2600 1DsMk3, which is what most of you are complaining the 5D2 isn't! You're crying, "Canon is making us pay for features!" Can you believe it? How strange! It seems you may have not bought a car lately. You're in for a huge downer if you want the GPS system or leather. This is the way it works people... Of and by the way if you want 45 AF points and you want to shoot Canon, you have 2 incredible options to choose from! If you really NEED 45 AF points, then you probably need 10fps/weather sealing/dual cards/etc anyways... Or you could just complain some more.
For me, I'll probably sell my 1Ds3 for the 5D2, as I primarily use my 1Ds3 for landscape/commercial/travel and it will be nice to save the weight (and the money). And of course I will keep my 1D3 as it is the ideal sports/event/wedding camera. What incredible versatility in a two camera combo. I'll have speed/performance, resolution, robustness or light weight, depending on the assignment/job at hand. Simply perfect.
You guys continue the whine session, which is fine because it's keeping me entertained. It's like watching Cops, "Better you than me"!
If you want all the features Canon can offer, step up to the price of the 1DsIII. If your budget doesn't allow weather sealing, Pro AF, etc... just use what you got and improvise. It's the way the world works, you want a better camera? pay for it.
Also, the complainers could just switch to Nikon. You can always stitch pano's to get the resolution you need for large prints
saaketham wrote:
I feel the Nikon crowd is more into photography and less into product-bashing/pixel-peeping, etc than a good chunk of the Canon crowd.
Probably because the Nikon crowd has no reason to complain... It used to be different though before the release of the D3/D300.
"With the advent of the Mark II Canon are finally talking about the dust / water resistance of the body, the second image below shows these seals, Canon's description: "The battery compartment, memory card door, LCD and the camera buttons are all fitted with sealing materials (indicated in red). In addition the adoption of high precision split-level alignment of the magnesium-alloy external covers, high precision dial construction and external rubber grip covers (indicated in green), has improved the camera's dust and water resistance.""
I'm sorry, but this camera sounds absolutely perfect for someone like me. If I could afford to upgrade my camera right now, this would be it. Looking at the preview, there are a LOT of nice little things (like finally having IR receiver for remotes on a non-Rebel body...RC1 is usable on this).
If you want all the features Canon can offer, step up to the price of the 1DsIII. If your budget doesn't allow weather sealing, Pro AF, etc... just use what you got and improvise. It's the way the world works, you want a better camera? pay for it.
I did...
Still, I need a portable 15MP, 5FPS FF back-up cam with at least a few cross points on the outer circle.
DPreview is reporting "Water resistance: 10 mm rain in 3 minutes " Sounds like a enough to satisfy me. I don't intentionally take my equipment into wet conditions, but I don't want to get paranoid about possibly getting caught in the rain.
Daan B wrote:
Probably because the Nikon crowd has no reason to complain... It used to be different though before the release of the D3/D300.
Understand me. I am not saying they don't complain about Nikon, I am saying they think the 5DII is very cool. If they had to complain about Nikon they would for sure say the 5DII is WAY cool!
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.
ulrikft wrote:
This attitude is quite arrogant and not very constructive.
1) How much do you think the ones that complain about weather sealing would pay for that feature? I suspect more than the $50 it would cost pr cam to implement
2) The competition has shown that it is possible. That makes complains more... easy to make.
Making blanket statements like the one you did is easy, but backing it up with real data is hard. Noone here wants a 1ds mark IIi feature set for 2690. I for one would, on the other hand, want a d700 feature set +/- for 2500-3500 somewhere, I don't think that is unreasonable. ...Show more →
I feel this is more of a "blanket statement", could you please back this up with some "real data"? Or we could just talk innuendo around each other's posts... Anyways, fortunately for you your dream camera exists, it is called the D700. If that's the camera I needed I certainly wouldn't let some peculiar blind brand loyalty stop me from buying it.
So are we to assume that just because it employs the same sensor arrangement that no improvements have taken place I'd find that hard to believe considering the 3 yrs of improvements in technology have occurred. Lets wait for someone to actually take a picture with the bloody thing before we write off its capabilities. If it sucks then...so be it. But all this speculation is really absurd considering noone has had their hot little hands on one yet.
bb
ocean7 wrote:
Understand me. I am not saying they don't complain about Nikon, I am saying they think the 5DII is very cool. If they had to complain about Nikon they would for sure say the 5DII is WAY cool!
For certain applications the 5D2 is a cool cam for sure. And I think the Nikonians are h@rn# for the one thing they miss in their line-up: (much) bigger than 12MP cams.
Daan B wrote:
Probably because the Nikon crowd has no reason to complain... It used to be different though before the release of the D3/D300.
Actually the Nikon forum was always rather low on the complaints. When Canon clearly outperformed them on ISO and MP, the standard comment was how they didn't really need that anyway.
Brad Barr wrote:
So are we to assume that just because it employs the same sensor arrangement that no improvements have taken place I'd find that hard to believe considering the 3 yrs of improvements in technology have occurred. Lets wait for someone to actually take a picture with the bloody thing before we write off its capabilities. If it sucks then...so be it. But all this speculation is really absurd considering noone has had their hot little hands on one yet.
bb
From RG.com:
"Autofocus The 5D Mark II's AF system, including its CMOS AF sensor, carries over mostly unaltered from the 5D, and is comprised of nine AF points plus six Assist AF points...
...Somewhat surprisingly, Canon has not adopted the 40D/50D's AF system which, on paper, is superior, given that all nine of its AF points are cross-type. Canon USA's Westfall says the reason for that is the "6 Assist AF points plus center point were deemed to provide a higher level of performance for AI Servo AF than the center point-only arrangement of the [40D and] 50D." Given that we've previously found the overall autofocus performance of the 5D to be decent, while the 40D's tracking capability has been erratic at best, Canon has likely chosen the better of the two AF systems for the 5D Mark II."
Coolmac wrote:
Actually the Nikon forum was always rather low on the complaints. When Canon clearly outperformed them on ISO and MP, the standard comment was how they didn't really need that anyway.
I shot Nikon and was an active member of Nikonians during that time... There was lots of complaining. Especially about how much high ISO sucked on the D2/D200 series in comparison to the Canon cams
I'd find that hard to believe considering the 3 yrs of improvements in technology have occurred. Lets wait for someone to actually take a picture with the bloody thing before we write off its capabilities. If it sucks then...so be it. But all this speculation is really absurd considering noone has had their hot little hands on one yet.