Canon 5D Mk3 Rumour!

The specs on that article are a little...er, ambitious! 30MP...really? I mean it took Canon long enough for canon to get to the MkII for the 5D MkI so I doubt there'll be a MkIII on the way for at least 12 months.
 
It's probably a racing certainty that there will be one at some point. And the autofocus system is the most obvious thing to improve.

I would hope that improving still further the high iso should take priority over any increase in resolution.

Having IS on the body would be great, but that would be very unlikely as they have settled for adding it to the lenses.

Maybe making them in a range of colours might be refreshing :D

Graham
 
Would have thought the 1Ds MkiV was the next upgrade & that could well be 30MP, taking to Canon they have hinted to leap frog the 3DX in that area.
 
Not sure about 30MP.....is that even needed?! No doubt they will improve the AF when it does actually get released to at least be on par with the 7D AF.

I may wait for it before going FF......but I don't want to even guess the price of it when released.
 
30mp - thats insane.

Crops on 100-400 would be brilliant - on an 800 prime....... You could see the future!
 
MKIII definitely on its way, maybe even Dec/Jan. Relayed directly from a Canon employee.
 
I don't really see why they would improve the AF to the standard of the 7D! A full-frame body, with advanced AF...... surely that would be starting to tread on the 1Ds 's toes?

The 5D is most suited to studio and landscape stuff I always thought, so improving the AF I don't think would really do much for it's buyers. What could the 1Ds mkIV offer that a 5DIII couldn't, apart from build quality and higher frame rate?
 
i dont mind the AF on the MKII, i took 700 shots yesterday in a hectic indian wedding. Some of them 1-2 seconds apart, and the AF was spot on every time. Inbetween that I hand to adjust zoom and recompose, so personally im well pleased with the AF.
 
I'll take a close look at it when it comes out but I'm not in any rush... The MKII suits my needs perfectly. I hope they put the 7D's AF in it and the iFCL metering and don't go bonkers with the megapixels.

Si
 
Why all the MP bashing? :D I would kill for 30MP in the studio, or even more!! Just much more flexibility and no need to worry about up sizing for the rare time I do want a SUPERSIZED print. If I pull off a lazy crop on the white BG, I might have already lost half my pixels to that featureless white wall.....as such I always shoot tight, try and leave little around the subject, but with groups of young kids it can be really difficult to keep up with action...I would love to be able to shoot a bit wider, from a bit further back, and know that I have a good 15 to 25 MP of detail....at the moment? It's probably 4MP of white wall, and 6MP of actual detail.

G.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Why all the MP bashing? :D I would kill for 30MP in the studio, or even more!! Just much more flexibility and no need to worry about up sizing for the rare time I do want a SUPERSIZED print. If I pull off a lazy crop on the white BG, I might have already lost half my pixels to that featureless white wall.....as such I always shoot tight, try and leave little around the subject, but with groups of young kids it can be really difficult to keep up with action...I would love to be able to shoot a bit wider, from a bit further back, and know that I have a good 15 to 25 MP of detail....at the moment? It's probably 4MP of white wall, and 6MP of actual detail.

G.
Click to expand...

NOISE! ;) Bigger the more MP you put on a sensor or equivalent size the more noise you'll see. Same goes for 40/50/60MP Hasselblads though because the sensor size is much larger they can get away with it a bit more.
 
Bendihossan said:
NOISE! ;) Bigger the more MP you put on a sensor or equivalent size the more noise you'll see. Same goes for 40/50/60MP Hasselblads though because the sensor size is much larger they can get away with it a bit more.
Click to expand...

Presumably though, for base ISO operations (50 / 100 / 200) whatever it may be, the noise is not going to be an issue? Appreciate D3S style functionality & 40MP is probably a pipe dream, but for me, I am thinking STUDIO only for now...I would keep my D3 for those other types of shoots.

G.
 
Does it need the 7D's AF? If we think of where the 5D sits between other models, it's positioned as a landscape/portrait camera, not a sports camera. Do you need the 7D AF system?
 
chris321 said:
I don't really see why they would improve the AF to the standard of the 7D! A full-frame body, with advanced AF...... surely that would be starting to tread on the 1Ds 's toes?

The 5D is most suited to studio and landscape stuff I always thought, so improving the AF I don't think would really do much for it's buyers. What could the 1Ds mkIV offer that a 5DIII couldn't, apart from build quality and higher frame rate?
Click to expand...

hsuffyan said:
i dont mind the AF on the MKII, i took 700 shots yesterday in a hectic indian wedding. Some of them 1-2 seconds apart, and the AF was spot on every time. Inbetween that I hand to adjust zoom and recompose, so personally im well pleased with the AF.
Click to expand...

EdinburghGary said:
Why all the MP bashing? :D I would kill for 30MP in the studio, or even more!! Just much more flexibility and no need to worry about up sizing for the rare time I do want a SUPERSIZED print. If I pull off a lazy crop on the white BG, I might have already lost half my pixels to that featureless white wall.....as such I always shoot tight, try and leave little around the subject, but with groups of young kids it can be really difficult to keep up with action...I would love to be able to shoot a bit wider, from a bit further back, and know that I have a good 15 to 25 MP of detail....at the moment? It's probably 4MP of white wall, and 6MP of actual detail.

G.
Click to expand...

Byker28i said:
Does it need the 7D's AF? If we think of where the 5D sits between other models, it's positioned as a landscape/portrait camera, not a sports camera. Do you need the 7D AF system?
Click to expand...

I have to agree with these views, I would love 30MP and not bothered about the AF. I can`t see the MKIII, if and when it comes along, being superior to the 1DIV in every respect.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Presumably though, for base ISO operations (50 / 100 / 200) whatever it may be, the noise is not going to be an issue? Appreciate D3S style functionality & 40MP is probably a pipe dream, but for me, I am thinking STUDIO only for now...I would keep my D3 for those other types of shoots.

G.
Click to expand...

You would have thought so, but have you seen the noise on the 7D at low ISOs? It's mental! :puke:
 
So can someone explain the maths,

If I've got a 15mp camera and print to 10x8, surely a 30mp camera printing at 10x8 will have twice or more detail condensed into the print. Will this show up any noise more or less?
 
Byker28i said:
So can someone explain the maths,

If I've got a 15mp camera and print to 10x8, surely a 30mp camera printing at 10x8 will have twice or more detail condensed into the print. Will this show up any noise more or less?
Click to expand...

in order to cram more and more into pixels into a sensor size that is fixed, the pixels need to be smaller in size, and a by product of this is image noise. I think the only way this trade off can be balanced in a newer MKIII with more MP's, is if Canon come up with better algorithms for ISO handling. A straight increase in MP's with improvements elsewhere would be a step backwards.

My 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
EdinburghGary said:
Surely the 7D is capable of a noiseless shot? Even on it's base ISO?

G.
Click to expand...

Hi Gary,

The 7D's ISO performance isn't all it's cracked up to be... I've sent two back now and changed to the 5DMKII. I was getting noise at ISO400 that certainly shouldn't have been there. My girlfriend does my second shooting at weddings and took a few shots with her 1000D over my shoulder at the same settings (as near as damn it) and had smoother images... I certainly don't expect a £300 camera to outclass a £1200 camera!

I know lots of people are really happy with their 7D's so maybe I just got unlucky but my experiences aren't good! :(

Si
 
Spiritflier said:
Hi Gary,

The 7D's ISO performance isn't all it's cracked up to be... I've sent two back now and changed to the 5DMKII. I was getting noise at ISO400 that certainly shouldn't have been there. My girlfriend does my second shooting at weddings and took a few shots with her 1000D over my shoulder at the same settings (as near as damn it) and had smoother images... I certainly don't expect a £300 camera to outclass a £1200 camera!

I know lots of people are really happy with their 7D's so maybe I just got unlucky but my experiences aren't good! :(

Si
Click to expand...

I hear you, but any comparison with a cropped sensor and full frame is biased in the full frames favour due to the relationship between sensor size and image noise. I had a 500D and I thought the ISO handling on it was fantastic and can only imagine the 7D being better. But I do agree with you about the MKII, I shot happily at 1600 all day in a oddly lit hall yesterday, with shutter speeds fast enough to freeze motion and apertures small enough to capture a decent amount of depth of field.
 
Last edited:
I haven't heard any complaints from the D3X camp....and indeed, I read somewhere it has the SAME ISO PERFORMANCE once you resized the image to the same as its predecessors....in otherwords, you get the full res image with no noise for those studio and landscape shots, and if you wanted D3/D3s ISO capability, you just need to remember to compare apples with apples, and downsize for a fair and accurate comparison?

This is all hear say, as I can't recall who said it. Was on the forums though...

G.
 
hsuffyan said:
in order to cram more and more into pixels into a sensor size that is fixed, the pixels need to be smaller in size, and a by product of this is image noise. I think the only way this trade off can be balanced in a newer MKIII with more MP's, is if Canon come up with better algorithms for ISO handling. A straight increase in MP's with improvements elsewhere would be a step backwards.

My 2 cents.
Click to expand...

Ok I can understand that. I know in the 40 to 50d they went to gapless microlenses to pack it all in, perhaps they'll do the same in the next sensor for the 5d.

The 50D has a 22.3 x 14.9 mm CMOS sensor at 15mp, the same size as the 7d which is 18mp.
The 5D mk2 a 36 x 24 mm CMOS sensor at 21mp, same as the 1Ds mk3?

30Mp probably isn't too much of a jump upwards of a full frame sensor, or maybe they'll make the sensor bigger?
 
the 7d is very good at its thing (sports/wildlife) cos it behaves very nicely at high iso but very badly at low which kinda sucks tbh

a 5d2 with pro series af would be lovely, a 5d2 with pro series af and even more cropping power would be amazing

I can pull headshots from full body shots without really worrying tbh
 
david1701 said:
a 5d2 with pro series af would be lovely, a 5d2 with pro series af and even more cropping power would be amazing
Click to expand...

But it wouldn't fit in the large range of bodies Canon have, which probably asks if they have too many by complicating the 50D/7D range? There's no room for a 60D with the 7D around (or is there)?
 
Byker28i said:
Ok I can understand that. I know in the 40 to 50d they went to gapless microlenses to pack it all in, perhaps they'll do the same in the next sensor for the 5d.

The 50D has a 22.3 x 14.9 mm CMOS sensor at 15mp, the same size as the 7d which is 18mp.
The 5D mk2 a 36 x 24 mm CMOS sensor at 21mp, same as the 1Ds mk3?

30Mp probably isn't too much of a jump upwards of a full frame sensor, or maybe they'll make the sensor bigger?
Click to expand...

I personally think that would never happen, unless canon introduce a completely new range venturing into medium format territory. This is also why I think the exciting new 4/3rds will never completely dominate DSLR's as the sensor size is prohibitive to 'serious' hobbyists and pro's.
 
But how far do we need to go before we get to the same resolution as film or have we passed that already?
 
Byker28i said:
But how far do we need to go before we get to the same resolution as film or have we passed that already?
Click to expand...

I dont think we need that, we (our eyes) and our printers dont resolve to the max of film cameras anyway, what we 'need' is what we had with MF film cameras, a smooth transition between colours/shades, something we dont get with small crop sensors. Add in noiseless images and its all pointing to better technology to improve the S/noise ratio if you pack the sensor with more pixels, regardless of gapless technology.

I shot 4 near identical images over the weekend and at window filling size (no 50/100% images) they were in order of viewer preference, 1Dmk2, 400d, 10d & 50D (for the same aperture/shutter speed using the same lens, tripod mounted), at 100% it became even more obvious which was the 'better' image. Resolution isnt everything.
So for me 12MP on a crop is about as far as needs go, perhaps we have reached the limit with FF too.

I can see an improved AF small bodied FF 5DMk3 at <£2500 being very attractive. I love my 1D but its a beast of a size and tbh if I could get the same camera (perhaps with a few less functions than the current mkIV) in a smaller body I'd be looking at it very seriously.

Matt
 
Last edited:
I think that I pretty much agree with what Harold M. Merklinger says in the above link. I think that even crop cameras overtook 35mm film in overall look some time ago.

As for noise free images, I think we're spoilt these days and that we should really remember what fast film looked like at the same print size. If we do that I don't think that high digital ISO looks too bad at all.
 
Byker28i said:
Does it need the 7D's AF? If we think of where the 5D sits between other models, it's positioned as a landscape/portrait camera, not a sports camera. Do you need the 7D AF system?
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the 5Dmk2 has IQ about as good as it gets at the moment. The soft underbelly of the 5D (mk1 and 2) has always been it's AF system and whilst the D700 owners have crawed on about their high ISO performance, it's the AF that really interests me.

Being fair, I moved to a 5D from a 1 series, and maybe I was spoiled by AF capability that was simply awesome. I really do miss it. I'd go as far as to say that if I were looking to replace my 5Dmk1, with the present options, I'd move to a D700. So I'm very much hoping that Canon finally sort out the AF as I'd prefer not to have to change my whole kit bag.


With regard to the question about the resolution of film. I remember reading a statement from Nikon a few years ago that film was the equivalent of a 13 megapixel image. So we hit that with the 5Dmk1 and D3/700.
 
Last edited:
EdinburghGary said:
Why all the MP bashing? :D I would kill for 30MP in the studio, or even more!! Just much more flexibility and no need to worry about up sizing for the rare time I do want a SUPERSIZED print. If I pull off a lazy crop on the white BG, I might have already lost half my pixels to that featureless white wall.....as such I always shoot tight, try and leave little around the subject, but with groups of young kids it can be really difficult to keep up with action...I would love to be able to shoot a bit wider, from a bit further back, and know that I have a good 15 to 25 MP of detail....at the moment? It's probably 4MP of white wall, and 6MP of actual detail.

G.
Click to expand...

The 5D3 will have at least 30mp for marketing reasons if nothing else, but we'll surely see it in the 1DsMk4 first. Given that a scaled up sensor from the 7D would deliver almost 47mp on full frame, that seems like a doddle. And high ISO performance would be sensational.

One of the reasons you get more noise out of smaller/high mp sensors is that the proportion of active sensor area lost to the walls between the pixels is so much higher. There's no such thing as truly 'gapless' pixels but they're getting closer. Noise is relative to the active light gathering area, which is not quite the same as the sensor size of number of pixels.

Full frame digital is now generally reckoned to be on a par with 645 medium format film. I think one of the limiting factors is now lens performance, as one of the unavoidable facts of physics is that as resolution goes up, contrast goes down. That's why when you compare for example a 5D2 image with a 7D with roughly the same number of pixels (21mp vs 18mp) and the same lens, the 5D2 wins hands down as the pixels are more than twice the size and that makes much less demands of the lens. Similarly, when you compare say a 40D and a 7D in the same way, with 10mp vs 18mp, you don't get an 80% better picture because all that extra detail is rendered at a much lower contrast level and most of it is lost to the eye (if it exists at all).

By the same token, images shot on medium format digital look much better than full frame. Sure they often have a few more pixles but it's the size of them that really makes the difference.

Ed Gary, I like your idea of lazy shooting and cropping in. That's one of the reasons I moved to full frame. I have seen portrait photographers doing just this with medium format film, setting up the camera to take in a wider view, high f/number for plenty of DoF and, on a tripod, not even looking through the viewfinder to shoot. Gives the subject great freedom, then crop in hard for the finished image.

For what you're doing, I think medium format digital might be worth trying. You will be blown away by the IQ and the cropping potential. It's about having a bigger image rather than merely more pixels. Hasselblads impress the heck out of clients and, well, they're so you :D
 
I could be wrong but i get the feeling that people (naturally) would like a 1Ds, in the body of a 5D, for the price of a 5D....forgetting that improved AF cannot be magically added without increasing the cost of the camera.
 
Blue Eagle said:
I could be wrong but i get the feeling that people (naturally) would like a 1Ds, in the body of a 5D, for the price of a 5D....forgetting that improved AF cannot be magically added without increasing the cost of the camera.
Click to expand...

No, what people want is

a 1Ds, in the body of a 5D, for the price of a 5p....

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top