EOSfun, I believe your time here is now over. The hype of the introduction is behind us, your prescient telling of the future has been debunked as mere opinionated market-speak, and however congenial you may be on the boards, I personally think many of us have had enough of the grade-school banter.
That's interesting. Is that the same for the other cameras using sRAW? (40D and such)
I'd like to read up on that and then play with it when I get one to explore. Sounds like a great feature.
Few people truly needed a 5D MkIII with more than 16MP, just as few 50D users 'needed' (term used loosely) much more than 12MP.
That is quite an elitarian point of view. I won't comment on your view on democracy, but let me stay with the EOSfun implications I think most consumers, photographers pro's can decide for themselves. And a fact is that technology improves and since our D1's or D30's EOS technology gave us more megapixels again and again. If people don't need the new tech, all the megapixels, they won't buy them. It's simple like that. I predict that a lot of people will buy the new camera. Not because those buyers are stupid, but because they know what I tell you: megapixels count and there is no substitute for megapixels
Chrono1081 wrote:
Im not trying to start a flamewar I want an honest opinion....
What more do people want from this camera that they aren't seeing? The only thing I see people wanting are features the 1 series has. Come on folks something has to be missing for there to be a reason to buy the 1 series over the 5 series.
You know I'm not suggesting it's a bad camera. I guess for me the features would have been an improved AF system and better sealing. Just perhaps a better all-around performer rather than essentially a great sensor.
I don't know. It'll deliver great results I'm sure. Nikon just seems to be making the cameras I'd like at the moment.
To be honest having looked at the new releases, I'll probably end up with a 50D in a few months and be very happy with it.
Jeff wrote:
EOSfun, I believe your time here is now over. The hype of the introduction is behind us, your prescient telling of the future has been debunked as mere opinionated market-speak, and however congenial you may be on the boards, I personally think many of us have had enough of the grade-school banter.
abam wrote:
for those of us who do fine art photography/printing for exhibitions, this is going to prove a great camera.
medium format MPs, and FF IQ in a body that will be $2400 on the street in 12 months' time.
still, i would be content with a 5D, exactly as it is today, but with dust-reduction and a 920k screen. (again, i'm an enthusiast who does fine art photography. shooting nudes is much less demanding of my AF than hummingbirds.)
At least somebody gets what the purpose of this camera is. Thank you.
Too funny how many clueless folks we have on here. All the complaints about basically not getting what the $7999 pro body price tag has. For $2700, which is about $500-600 less than the original price of the 5D, there is still whining? This camera is built all on IQ. I think folks who have the 1ds3 have more reasons to complain.
> EOSfun, I believe your time here is now over. The hype of the introduction is behind us, your prescient telling of the future has been debunked as mere opinionated market-speak, and however congenial you may be on the boards, I personally think many of us have had enough of the grade-school banter.
But, that's just my not-so-humble opinion.
That's pretty rude, Jeff. Eosfun never speaks meanly to anyone. And he contributes a lot. Some people get irritated by his eccentricities, but those are just his way of having ...fun. Once you know that, it's not difficult to overlook it if it annoys you. Or just don't read his posts.
crfrey71 wrote:
At least somebody gets what the purpose of this camera is. Thank you.
Too funny how many clueless folks we have on here. All the complaints about basically not getting what the $7999 pro body price tag has. For $2700, which is about $500-600 less than the original price of the 5D, there is still whining? This camera is built all on IQ. I think folks who have the 1ds3 have more reasons to complain.
That is kinda the heart of the point though. Given how the market is changing, should we be paying $8k for those features.
Does having a great sensor justify them skimping on other features.
Jeff wrote: EOSfun, I believe your time here is now over. The hype of the introduction is behind us, your prescient telling of the future has been debunked as mere opinionated market-speak, and however congenial you may be on the boards, I personally think many of us have had enough of the grade-school banter. But, that's just my not-so-humble opinion. My vote for this.
eosfun wrote:
That is quite an elitarian point of view. I won't comment on your view on democracy, but let me stay with the EOSfun implications I think most consumers, photographers pro's can decide for themselves. And a fact is that technology improves and since our D1's or D30's EOS technology gave us more megapixels again and again. If people don't need the new tech, all the megapixels, they won't buy them. It's simple like that. I predict that a lot of people will buy the new camera. Not because those buyers are stupid, but because they know what I tell you: megapixels count and there is no substitute for megapixels ...Show more →
True enough, but they will need a new computer with lots of storage too
For me, it would have been preferable that the Mark II had:
-Less that 21MP (even 12MP is enough)
-16 bit Raw files (that's probably more important, have you seen digital MF files in terms of tonal gradation? also pixels are bigger there)
-Wider distribution of AF points. I don't care if they have 100 or 200 points all bunched up in the center. Nikon is not doing well on this respect either as far as I know.
-Firewire connectivity. Lots of people are crying about how slow the Ds III when shooting tethered.
-I do not care about the video.
VanKou wrote:
For me, it would have been preferable that the Mark II had:
-Less that 21MP (even 12MP is enough)
-16 bit Raw files (that's probably more important, have you seen digital MF files in terms of tonal gradation? also pixels are bigger there)
-Wider distribution of AF points. I don't care if they have 100 or 200 points all bunched up in the center. Nikon is not doing well on this respect either as far as I know.
-Firewire connectivity. Lots of people are crying about how slow the Ds III when shooting tethered.
-I do not care about the video.
just my 2c
Some people who know stuff doubt MF backs are really 16bits.
USB can be faster than FW, the problem is the implementation.
brainiac wrote:
If we are honest, they were going to get that anyway. One day.
I know, I am writing this on my first iMac, which I am liking big time. Mac Pro next , I'm going to take the old unreliable windows box and load linux on it - any recommendations?
Chrono1081 wrote:
Off topic but I just watched the worst act of stupidity ever....
A co-worker recently bought a 1Ds Mark III purely for the megapixels and just smashed it on the floor after reading about the 5D Mark II in the email I sent the "camera people"...wtf! AND I HAVE NO WAY TO TAKE A PICTURE CAUSE MY CAMERA IS BACK IN THE STATES *CRY*
Not to mention it looks like he has the 85 1.2 attached that suffered most of the damage but hes yelling and throwing stuff so I'm not going into that office. I think I just witnessed a mental breakdown.......Show more →
Specs look good. Seems like a good but not great upgrade. Very disappointed that it has the same poor AF as the original. And the points being so close to the center makes them almost useless to me. Invisible focus points ---- don't exist, nothing more than pixie dust. New high res LCD looks good, 21mp is overkill though for most people, I would have preferred something between 16 and 18 w/ a better AF system. Will I upgrade? Probably not.
I think most consumers, photographers pro's can decide for themselves. And a fact is that technology improves and since our D1's or D30's EOS technology gave us more megapixels again and again. If people don't need the new tech, all the megapixels, they won't buy them. It's simple like that. I predict that a lot of people will buy the new camera. Not because those buyers are stupid, but because they know what I tell you: megapixels count and there is no substitute for megapixels 
More pixels drive their business as well.