Canon USA Announces EOS 5D Mark III

[Martin Campbell]

Originally Posted by Ted Ramasola

Hey! I just saw on the end of the Mario&Nette where they show scenes with lenses used they Posted EF 24-70mm f2.8L IS II USM ! Not just once but twice, Does that mena that the New 24-70 NOW has IS ?! whooohoo!

Don't hold your breath there Ted - I think that might be a mistake. they also have the 16-35mm as an IS lens too showing there!

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Huh? It was 1080p before and it's 1080p now.

If you're referring to the frame rate, it is 1080p30 (+p24 & p25) and 720p60 (+p50).

You won't ever see 1080p60 on one of these until it becomes a broadcast standard...
in other words, not anytime soon. Maybe on a Cinema EOS product, eventually,
but not in the regular EOS lineup.

Apologize for my nomenclature. I also was confusing my 5D II frame rates with my 2ti frame rates. I had forgotten that only the T2i had 720p60.

Point is that with the T2i, T3i, and 7D, some users what 1080p60, primarily to improve slow motion effects.

I have that capability on my lowly VG20, (unless Sony is not providing true 1080p60 ????) and wonder why Canon hasn't seen fit to increase that capability.

That is only point I was making.

[Chris Hurd]

Frankly I'd like to see frame rates higher than 60p for slow motion, but I seriously doubt Canon will do that in a regular EOS camera. Cinema EOS, well maybe there's some hope... but I wouldn't hold my breath just yet.

[Zach Love]

Originally Posted by Brian Brown

As video shooters, we tend to forget that, other than the C300, the entire EOS line are first and foremost stills cameras with a tacked-on video capability. And (I'm guessing) 95% of their market buys these cameras for taking stills... with the video as a bonus. Shooting video with a stills camera will always introduce compromises. I, for one, and willing to make them to get a filmic image. I know many pros that are not.

It HAS to be more than 5% of 5D Mark II owners that bought the camera for video. I have to think it was at least 25% of 5D Mark II sales were because of video, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was all the way up to 50% of the sales. (I bought my 7D mostly because of video.)

Canon has to have the numbers on this & I'd love to see the data. I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon, Sony, Panasonic & others have done massive market research into the EOS HD cameras too.

The 5D Mark III is an improvement on video, but I see the biggest thing missing is the clean HDMI.

If Canon has prevented a clean HDMI because they don't want to hurt XF300 or C300 sales, then I think Canon has already lost. These cameras do not compete with each other, they compliment each other.

Panasonic's AC130, AC160 & HPX250 compliment each other, instead of compete with each other. Because of this, we get better cameras.

Since there is clean HDMI (or better HD-SDI) being offered from Panasonic, Sony & Nikon, I think Canon might lose the title of king of the hill of HDSLRs, as it seems like to me these other companies are paying attention to what is happening...

It isn't a revolution, it is an evolution.

[Justin Molush]

Agreed on the higher FPS point - Offering 720/120p would be phenomenal, but we will probably have to wait for the next C300 revision. Hopefully by then Ill be able to afford the current C300 haha

[Brian Brown]

Originally Posted by Zach Love

It HAS to be more than 5% of 5D Mark II owners that bought the camera for video. I have to think it was at least 25% of 5D Mark II sales were because of video, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was all the way up to 50% of the sales. (I bought my 7D mostly because of video.)

Zach, if the numbers were anywhere near what you suggest, Canon (or someone else) would have made a dedicated video body with a better ergonomics and a large 2k sensor that shoots ideal video instead of the down-sampled stuff we have to live with. They'd be crazy NOT to if they could sell hundreds of thousands of units. But the market is simply not there.

I live in a tourist town where all summer people drive up here and lug around their prosumer Canons and Nikons, with big old 70-200/2.8s (or 400mm beasts) to capture the wildlife and have never once seen anybody shooting video with theirs. Not once. And these are people from all over the world. And I get stopped all of the time with these same people asking about my LCDVF... "what is THAT thing for??!"

I can assure you, purchasing a DSLR primarily for video capture is a fringe activity compared to the millions of units sold for primarily shooting stills.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Regarding 1080p60, of course everybody wants it. Keep in mind that such a feature would go beyond a firmware update. It would require enough speed from the sensor, DSP, and storage system. It might also affect heat and battery life.

I'm really hoping that we will see some good exposure and focus aids like zebras and an inset magnified view. While 1080p60 takes real hardware ($$$), Magic Lantern has shown that such UI features can be done in firmware and are not costly.

[Chris Barcellos]

Brian, if that is the case, why has Canon acknowledge that its video/film making features were ground breaking in the 5D II and that this tradition is carried forward and improved. Its because they know the 5D created a whole new class of DSLR user, and users that tend to buy on the heavy end with accessories too !.

[Emmanuel Plakiotis]

Its very difficult to estimate the number of people who bought Canon for video, because most of them are using it for stills also.
Myself for example, bought it for both, but I would have get a Nikon if it didn't had the video feature, since I am a Nikon user since the 80s. As a result I also bought 2 7Ds, 3 Canon lenses, plus adapters for my Nikon lenses.
But if you see me on vacation, I mostly shoot photos with my 7D, because I don't find the idea of leisure videotaping appealing.
Canon hampered 5Diii not only by not having clean HDMI, but also by not incorporating the Hi bitrate of 1Dx. Chris Hurd had suggested, when 1Dx was out, that this will not be the best Canon DSLR option for video and we should wait for the next 5D model. Evidently Canon proved him wrong. Apparently Canon thought, that photo journalists who shoot video must enjoy better video than studio users. But at $6K 1Dx is very expensive as an alternative to a dedicated videocamera, especially with the option of FS100 and the newly launched lens adapters.
Usually market leaders tend to overcharge for their products and Canon did exactly that with all her new outings. But the way the market is saturated, that could be a risky path.
What would have been an instant order of the new model on my behalf, now is a wait and see decision.

[Peer Landa]

So what happened to the "EOS C" that Canon showed at the C300 unveiling -- did that end up being the 1DX or is it yet something to come..?

http://www.dvinfo.net/news/new-canon...velopment.html

-- peer

[Brian Brown]

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

Brian, if that is the case, why has Canon acknowledge that its video/film making features were ground breaking in the 5D II and that this tradition is carried forward and improved. Its because they know the 5D created a whole new class of DSLR user, and users that tend to buy on the heavy end with accessories too !.

I think Canon was surprised as anyone else about the gravitation of the film community to the 5D2. And if it helps sell a few thousand more bodies, why not? I'd still argue that we're a low fraction of typical users. And that video capabilities were originally put on DSLRs to facilitate photojournalists grabbing some add'l video along with their stills.

I've been using my 7D professionally for over two years, for corporate and broadcast work, and know of few other pros in my region that have adopted the form factor for day-to-day work the way that I have. I also teach an intro to DSLR video class at a regional learning co-op and most of my students have video-capable DSLRs of various makes and models, but they were all purchased for stills.

Other people's circles may well be different, but I feel like I've garnered plenty of data in my particular region over the past two years. I've seen maybe 700-800 prosumer bodies being used for stills in the mountains, and around the cities here in Colorado, and at kids' sporting events, and can count only two times I've seen someone shooting video with their DSLR. If it's a revolution, I'm sure not seeing it here.

If you have other data and observations, please share them.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Originally Posted by Brian Brown

Sareesh, you're teetering on the edge of trolling, here. If you don't like the look of FF, prefer the look of your GH2, and think that the C300 "barely makes the grade", then what are you really contributing here? Each camera is vastly different than the next, and tailored to vastly different market segments. Until I've filmed something similar with each of them, I'll withhold judgement.

You are right, I shouldn't be so negative. Thanks for reminding me.

I agree with you on the rest.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

The GH2 is an ergonomic nightmare. In my hands it feels like a tiny little plastic toy.

It does in my hands too, which is why I didn't buy it myself.

[Zach Love]

Originally Posted by Brian Brown

I think Canon was surprised as anyone else about the gravitation of the film community to the 5D2. And if it helps sell a few thousand more bodies, why not? I'd still argue that we're a low fraction of typical users. And that video capabilities were originally put on DSLRs to facilitate photojournalists grabbing some add'l video along with their stills.

Canon put video in as an after thought after they figured out how to do live view in a DSLR. They were totally surprised by the fact that video people went crazy over it, when it was supposed to be just a "novelty" feature for still photojournalists.

I'm sure they've have been pleased with the profits they've generated. But I just don't see them responding as well as Sony, Panasonic & Nikon have responded in giving people the features they want (*cough... clean HDMI *cough *cough)

Originally Posted by Brian Brown

I've seen maybe 700-800 prosumer bodies being used for stills in the mountains, and around the cities here in Colorado, and at kids' sporting events, and can count only two times I've seen someone shooting video with their DSLR. If it's a revolution, I'm sure not seeing it here.

If you have other data and observations, please share them.

Just look at DVInfo, there is more interest when a new DSLR gets announced than when a video new camera gets announced. This thread has gotten more traffic in 24 hours than JVC's 4K camera has in a month.

Even more, Televisual put the 5Dii on their top ten most rented cameras in 2010 & 2011.
Televisual | HOMEPAGE
Televisual | HOMEPAGE

Tourists & soccer parents aren't the people I consider video professionals that are buying still cameras for professional usage. Video professionals are selling their HVX200s & their EX1s to purchase a DSLR rig. That says something big.

I bought my 7D because it does stills & video, but the deciding factor on why I got the 7D & not another DSLR was the video. I think there is a large percentage of customers Canon won in the last couple years that shared my decision rational.

I agree with you that I would much rather have hard data of the 5Dii than just my observations. Second to that data, I'd love to see some analysis of sales of the D800 vs 5Diii, and how much a clean HDMI signal influenced those sales.

[Brian Brown]

No, Zach, but tourists and soccer parents make up the 95% that I'm talking about (gross sales) for prosumer cameras. Not to mention photographers themselves, pro and semi-pros, and wannabes. And, as I intimated, of a dozen or so of my peers in video production, I don't know a single one other than myself that use a DSLR on a regular basis. If you know some that gave up their EX1 & EX3s for DSLRs, I don't. One I know uses a RED, but she's a filmmaker. The others stick by their tape and tapeless pro HD cams, since they want timecode, sync XLR sound, zebras, long-form, form-factor, pro codecs, etc. Kids in college that want to make a film would surely gravitate toward DSLRs for their filmic qualities, but as for most pros that make $ with their gear... I'm in a tiny minority lugging around my 7D and Tascam, rigs, and do-dads.

Until shown otherwise, I just don't think the numbers are there. Naturally sites like this are going to have a preponderance of DSLR video shooters. But I'd still say we're in a VAST minority to those that buy the bodies to shoot stills.

But at the ratios you estimate, someone would have built a large sensor video camera for us (that does NOT cost $16k). But they haven't. So I think we're a terribly small percentage. And I'll stand by that until shown otherwise.

FWIW, clean-HDMI out isn't terribly important to me. The Canon codec is good enough to make me $ with my DSLR every day and turn around an edit in hours. I just want to kill the moire' and step-up to FF goodness. Everyone has different needs and desires in their gear.

When the D800 and 5D3 come out, I'll do a day rental on them and run them through their paces to decide which one to buy. It's a VERY good time to be a professional (or hobbyist) in this field.