eosfun wrote:
They just got their answer, clear enough. Canon has a different philosophy on camera manufacturing than Nikon. They spend their R&D money on image quality rather than features, while Nikon spend more on features since image quality for the greatest part is defined by components they buy from third parties. Really a very different business model. It was clear enough that the audience in the segment Canon created with the 5D a few years back has their priorities first set on EOSfun through full frame image quality. Remember that was in the time when Nikon told all of their customers they would not need full frame! DX was the way to go and APS format had its own benefits. Now that Sony developed full frame sensors and Nikon has access to it they decided to change their policy. FX was an extra format. Unfortunately for them Sony did not provide a full frame sensor that outperforms Canon's sensors. So Nikon is forced to compete in other areas with features like that wonderful level tool for example and a semi conservative body design with ergonomic benefits.
Anyway the D700 with a Canon label won't come ...Show more →
what happens when the D800 gets to 18-21 MP AND has the fps and AF?
how can canon not finally respond then?
they will be killed.
truly nobody would care at that point it the 5dmkiii was 30MP and 4fps with 6 year old AF if they D800 had 20MP an dhigh body performance?
Canon has also done something that Nikon doesn't, in that if you shoot RAW, you effectively have a fullframe body with 3 different resolutions. That alone is fantastic.
I can understand those who are saying it is never enough but frankly I do want a small body, weather sealing and good focus. Nothing wrong with that. If it cost more fine but for my type of work the 1 series are too heavy and too big.
what happens when the D800 gets to 18-21 MP AND has the fps and AF? how can canon not finally respond then? they will be killed. truly nobody would care at that point it the 5dmkiii was 30MP and 4fps with 6 year old AF if they D800 had 20MP an dhigh body performance?
And when is this going to happen? What tells you Canon doesn't have a timely response to market developments like you mention? You prefer a 20 MP body with bells and whistles over a 30MP body with better image quality? I'd rather pick the EOSfun BTW, this is not a killing thing. Canon and Nikon can very well live together in this market. In fact, they both profile themselves in contrast to the other company.
I am thrilled with the release of the 5dmkII. I reckon it is real value for money.
What more do we want?
1. 21mp almost twice the resolution of Nikon D700
2. Hi ISO capabilities that at least equal that of the D700 at almost twice the resolution
3. Video mode as a bonus
Negatives if you consider them negatives
1. In terms of weather sealing, I do not consider it a real problem. I been shooting against large media photographers and they all use weather protectors when it just starts to drizzle and they all use 1 series bodies. Yes its great to have it but the pros still end up using weather jacket when it rains. Weather sealing is only great if everything you are shooting with is weather sealed. Recently I shot in a rain affected event with my colleague. Guess what happened. His 1 series body was OK, his flash died and his 24-70L lens stopped working. The seal on the focus rim got stuck and broke once water got in. We all use weather jacket and it was fine.
2. Some complained about number of focus points. I owned the 1dmkIII and 1dsmkIII and for 98% of the time I shoot with single focus point.
So we have a camera with almost twice the resolution of the D700 and also at a cheaper price, it is obvious that this is one awesome camera. By the way it is also almost 1/3 the price of the 1dsmkIII.
Well I an no1 on the list for this fine camera and look forward in using this in conjunction with my 1dmkIII and 1dsmkIII.
At the beginning of the year I had a 30D and wanted a new body. The AF issues and inconsistancies with the 1DIII meant I had to look elsewhere. I could not afford a 3 month trip to South America including Antarctica and swapping systems into a Nikon D3 and associated lenses. When Canon did not release the 5DII in the first half of the year I decided that the 5D was my logical choice.
Since the 5DII's announcement I am still happy with my choice. Why...
1. It won't be in stores until after I depart
2. Although its extra features are good, there is nothing that for me justify the extra $.
3. I am already concerned over storage space required for 3 months shooting for my 5D and wife's Pentax K10D. At over 25mb per file for the 5DII I know I wouldn't have enough
Now if it were a D700 in Canon clothing...................
skibum5 wrote:
except for the fact that the D700 gives the fat full pro body experience
Yes but unless you need that feature, you are paying for it and getting almost half the resolution. At least in the Canon structure, you only need to pay for that feature if you require it. I can tell you I know which feature I prefer if I can only afford 1 camera and that is the 5dmkII
eosfun wrote:
And when is this going to happen? What tells you Canon doesn't have a timely response to market developments like you mention? You prefer a 20 MP body with bells and whistles over a 30MP body with better image quality? I'd rather pick the EOSfun BTW, this is not a killing thing. Canon and Nikon can very well live together in this market. In fact, they both profile themselves in contrast to the other company.
too be honest id rather had a 5dmkii with 16.7MP and better AF than 21MP and three year old flimsy 5d AF. What good are ISO3200/ISO6400 for sports or wildlife when you can't ai servo track them? And for landscapes I can always use a tripod and use ISO100. Ok there are other uses for high ISO too, but bad AF cripples at least half of them.
In fact, i bet 80-90% of complaints would be gone if they had simply given better AF, shutter lag, etc. instead of extra MP.
In some ways id rather have 12MP and D700 than 21MP and flimsy old AF and slow fps. in fact for what i am doing this entire year a D700 would be worlds better than any option i have from canon.
I prefered the 20D over the D200. The 20D had much better high ISO an for all the bells and whisltes of the D200 the AF was nothign special. But times are changing, what was true in 5D's day is no longer true. Back then FF was a unique thing from canon and you'd be eoshappy to get it in any sort of body for less than 1ds price.
how can you not imrpove AF over three years?? even the xxD line you've made some improvements over the years at least. Would it hurt canon to put in an old 1dmkii module if they couldnt take time to rework the 5d AF? What were they doing the extra years other than resting smugly on their laurels?
And once the players all get to a solidly delivered 20MP or so, yeah, i seriously doubt many would go for a 30MP cam with 6 year old body features over a 20MP that had state of the art perforrnance in the body.
i'll see what the reality of the AF in it is like, but if really is that tired and old and even worse than the 20D/50D AF for action then I simply wont be able to use the camera for what i will do over the next year and at best will get it far later once they have to start double rebating it to move it or eventually swap to nikon if i continue to do enough action stuff (1 series are too bulky and i cant afford both a 1 series and another body for other stuff, which is less than ideal anyway).
or at least i have lots of thinkign to do. i had thought it was going to be an easy decision to instantly jump at the 5dmkii at release date....
anyway i've babbled way too much so i will now slink into silent mode
pcho wrote:
Yes but unless you need that feature, you are paying for it and getting almost half the resolution. At least in the Canon structure, you only need to pay for that feature if you require it. I can tell you I know which feature I prefer if I can only afford 1 camera and that is the 5dmkII
Perry
12 megapixels does NOT equate to half the resolution of 21 megapixels....thanks to the good old square law.
pcho wrote:
Yes but unless you need that feature, you are paying for it and getting almost half the resolution. At least in the Canon structure, you only need to pay for that feature if you require it. I can tell you I know which feature I prefer if I can only afford 1 camera and that is the 5dmkII
Perry
true it is much better for those who dont need mcuh fps or af but for those who do, canon is setup way worse
anyway ive said too mcuh and will sit back as a lurker for a while
scott f wrote:
The reason everyone is complaining about the AF and frame rate of the 5Dm2 is that they want a camera that can do action. Currently Canon doesn't make one that anybody would trust to buy(aka 1Dm3's troubled history). So, either you look at Nikon, or use a Mark2..............or complain that the 5Dm2 can't do it.
cant you use the new 50d for sports? it would seem to work well enough with the right lenses and a real ability of the person clicking the shutter
Canon is not Nikon and there never going to put a pro AF in a prosumer body. One of the distinquishing features of a pro body over a prosumer is the AF system along with better build, weather sealing, and a more robust shutter life.
If you need this in a Canon camera you will need to buy a 1 series or move to another brand. All of the wishing in the world is not going to change Canon's mindset. If they were interested in making such a change you would have seen it in the 50D and 5DMKII because of the present models offered by Nikon. They didn't do it so that should show you it isn't going to happen.
As to the AF I think Canon wanted to put a known variable into this new camera so they could be assured that both the 5DMKII and the 50D would at least fucntion as the previous model as far as the AF goes. Putting a new AF system in these cameras after the other changes may have been pushing it too far for Canon's comfort zone after the MKIII fiasco. How many people stated they would have been happy with the MKIII if they had just left the AF system of the MKIIn in it since it was proven.
Canon is not going to put a new AF system in any of their new cameras until it is tested thoroughly for some time. There is just too much at stake having another new camera not perform because of its AF system.
All in all it is a nice camera at a good price point for what you get. If it is not for you there is many other options with other companies. I think the IQ of this camera will be great and with the many other improvements it is a good offering.
too be honest id rather had a 5dmkii with 16.7MP and better AF than 21MP and three year old flimsy 5d AF.
Find a mint second hand 1DsmkII and you'll be EOShappy (just to use your own synonym for feel like EOSfun) ! Just don't wait and complain Canon didn't give you a D700 with the fabulous EF mount
Some of you guys sound like a bunch of old ladies sitting around bitching and complaining about a product you know squat about. It's not even available and all the "experts" are already chiming in with their experience as if they actually had the camera. Oh yeah, that 3.9fps sound like a real improvement from the 5D!
Ulrikft wrote: Now, can someone light a fire up under Canon's ass, so that I can get a hold of one soon? :P I want it yesterday!
You see, that's the way it works. You criticized the camera for it's specs and still you want one yesterday. Take the boat to Denmark, count your crowns, have a and lots of EOSfun!
My opinion is that just about every complaint I've seen about this camera today from fellow wedding photographers is that the AF is a problem for them. Addressing that would have removed 99% of those complaints at a stroke. As it is they remain.
How were these ever made with such a faulty AF module?:
I've shot with the 5D for 2 years professionally so I have experience here. It's a fabulous camera but the AF remains deeply average. It's not especially accurate, it's fairly slow and combined with a longish shutter lag and mirror blackout can make for a frustrating wedding camera. Using a D700 shows exactly where the 5D is lacking. Fast, deadly accurate. These are not just my opinions, they're echoed by hundreds of fellow pros at DWF.
I can't help but think that Canon knows this and would be making a much bigger deal of the AF were it improved. ...Show more →
They want you to buy a 1 series. I'm sure the actual per unit cost of better af is minimal.
BTW, this is not a killing thing. Canon and Nikon can very well live together in this market. In fact, they both profile themselves in contrast to the other company.
and lots of EOSfun!