User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/31/2015 1:56:57 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Rumor is out today that it will be officially announced next week, it looks like canon is trying to play the pixel game and catch up with nikon What's the skinny on it? I've avoided camera discussions for years because it becomes a pissing contest and people seem to be hyper-focused on equipment rather than art. That said, I'm probably coming up for an upgrade soon so this might be relevant. ETA: Here's a link Looks like the major thing is it's a 50mp camera with a new processor designed for detail and color accuracty at the expense of low-light capabilities. Now, "capabilities" is a big word, and it looks like they are speaking in terms of pushing the ISO up to astronomical numbers instead of low-light noise quality. Those can go hand-in-hand of course, but I doubt anyone shooting this camera will be using it for action. I'm guessing this will be my niche's replacement camera. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/2/2015 10:09:44 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Rumor is out today that it will be officially announced next week, it looks like canon is trying to play the pixel game and catch up with nikon Sony sensor so this should more than catch up to Nikon's D810, and catch up to it's dynamic range. To give you an idea on how old the 5dmk3 sensor is, the D700 (with the D3 sensor) has the same or slightly more dynamic range, iirc. It will be interesting once Canon announces all three... 5ds, 5dsr, and the 5dmk4. The rumor specs tend to suggest the 5dmk4 will not have a competitive Nikon until they come out with the true D700 replacement with D4 internals. This is a shot directly across Nikon's bow is how I see it. I see excitement with the 5dmk4, but once everyone gets past the megapixel hype of the D810, 5Ds, and 5Ds R, they'll realize lenses to resolve to those levels will make the body look cheap, cost-wise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2015 5:07:02 PM EDT
[#3]
Saw today that the sensor is Canon, not Sony. Official announcement coming Friday the 6th.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2015 7:24:44 PM EDT
[#4]
I'll be excited to get a couple of these in the studio. The improvement from the MkII to MkIII in terms of color accuracy was a pretty big leap. Can't wait to see what this guy can do.
All my personal gear will remain Nikon 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 9:50:02 AM EDT
[#5]
Wow! Just WOW!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 10:21:04 AM EDT
[#6]
Sounds like all that's changed is 50mp. I'm going to hold my breath and wait to see noise quality of long-exposure low-light images on this, because that will be the make/break for most photographers who are interested in the camera. After all, ya can't do much landscape/architecture without operating in low-light conditions. Cramming all those pixels into a tiny sensor can't be great.
I was kind of hoping for some form of built-in wifi or some way I can trip the shutter with my phone and without a cord. I like the dual card slot, intelligent viewfinder and the electronic level. The timelapse movie thing might be interesting instead of having to take a million photos and put them together in post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 10:37:23 AM EDT
[#7]
Suggested Retail = $3,699.00
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 3:43:53 PM EDT
[#8]
Perhaps its just me, but does anybody else think we are going full retard on the megapixel count?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 3:54:10 PM EDT
[#9]
I'd take super low light over super mega pixel any day.
ByteTheBullet (-: |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 5:40:49 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps its just me, but does anybody else think we are going full retard on the megapixel count? I felt that way... but this is a game changer for super detailed landscapes. I think I read a megapixel change of 3x is noticeable. So this one should be. My first camera was 320 x 240 resolution. = .76 Megapixel. I really noticed the difference when I moved up to 640 x 480. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 7:09:03 PM EDT
[#11]
Cool. Nothing there that would make me ditch my 1Dx or 5D3, but for those guys that do certain types of photography, this is very cool. There's a HUGE amount of data in every image.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 9:17:09 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I felt that way... but this is a game changer for super detailed landscapes. I think I read a megapixel change of 3x is noticeable. So this one should be. My first camera was 320 x 240 resolution. = .76 Megapixel. I really noticed the difference when I moved up to 640 x 480. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Perhaps its just me, but does anybody else think we are going full retard on the megapixel count? I felt that way... but this is a game changer for super detailed landscapes. I think I read a megapixel change of 3x is noticeable. So this one should be. My first camera was 320 x 240 resolution. = .76 Megapixel. I really noticed the difference when I moved up to 640 x 480. I don't recall people clamoring for higher resolution still image capability after the 36 megapixel D800 came out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 9:26:51 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps its just me, but does anybody else think we are going full retard on the megapixel count? Yes and no. Lots of resolution is nice, but you also have to have the lenses, computer, and technique to support it. Theoretically, a higher resolution photo that is downsized to a smaller resolution should look better because... reasons. Look up supersampling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 9:31:00 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My first camera was 320 x 240 resolution. = .76 Megapixel. I really noticed the difference when I moved up to 640 x 480. I would hope so. The resolution doubled. But those images are tiny. We are now talking about going from very large resolution pictures to humongous when most will be viewed on a 24" 1080p monitor or 4"-5" smartphone screen. I would rather there be large improvements in dynamic range and high ISO performance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2015 10:16:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would hope so. The resolution doubled. But those images are tiny. We are now talking about going from very large resolution pictures to humongous when most will be viewed on a 24" 1080p monitor or 4"-5" smartphone screen. I would rather there be large improvements in dynamic range and high ISO performance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My first camera was 320 x 240 resolution. = .76 Megapixel. I really noticed the difference when I moved up to 640 x 480. I would hope so. The resolution doubled. But those images are tiny. We are now talking about going from very large resolution pictures to humongous when most will be viewed on a 24" 1080p monitor or 4"-5" smartphone screen. I would rather there be large improvements in dynamic range and high ISO performance. Wait for the 5D mark IV for that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2015 6:51:50 PM EDT
[#16]
I'd fork over the cash for a 5Ds-R this afternoon if it was available.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2015 12:02:35 AM EDT
[#17]
Would rather have a Pentax 645z.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2015 1:11:54 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would rather have a Pentax 645z. At more than twice the price, why not? Get 2! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2015 9:49:59 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps its just me, but does anybody else think we are going full retard on the megapixel count? I figure the MK III will kill the S in low light. Look at the 6D and 5Dmkiii. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2015 9:52:31 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I figure the MK III will kill the S in low light. Look at the 6D and 5Dmkiii. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Perhaps its just me, but does anybody else think we are going full retard on the megapixel count? I figure the MK III will kill the S in low light. Look at the 6D and 5Dmkiii. The Canon store has refurb 5DmIIIs for about $2500 or less. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2015 8:49:38 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
At more than twice the price, why not? Get 2! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Would rather have a Pentax 645z. At more than twice the price, why not? Get 2! My buddy just bought one. It's nice. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 1:24:38 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryI figure the MK III will kill the S in low light. I own some very capable tripods... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 1:30:24 AM EDT
[#23]
Most lenses won't resolve past 20MP in practical shooting, even L series. The ones that do resolve past that need to be stopped down, which is not how I shoot.
Give me noise and DR performance. Fuck this marketing bullshit and the bloated files. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 9:04:09 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I own some very capable tripods... Quote HistoryQuoted:
I figure the MK III will kill the S in low light. I own some very capable tripods... I do too but they would suck for weddings, concerts, or anything else that moves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 9:58:10 AM EDT
[#25]
Dammit, I'm waiting for the "D820" to come out before I upgrade from my 800E
If they decide to chase Canon, go crazy on the megapickles and don't actually improve on anything else, I'm gonna be pissed. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
