Printable View
pretty boring upgrade.
* 15.1 megapixel CMOS sensor
* DIGIC 4
* 1.6x crop
* Dust Reduction
* Auto Brightness Processing
* 95% viewfinder .97 magnification
* 9 point af (All Cross Type)
* 35 meter area equipped with high-precision sensors
* AF Fine Tuning
* ISO 100-12800
* 6.3 fps (high speed) 3fps (low speed)
* Buffer: 16 RAW - 60 JPG - 10 RAW+JPG
* 920,000 points VGA 3.0-inch LCD monitor
* 100,000 cycle shutter
* Rugged magnesium alloy bodyFull Specifications
I call HOAX.
DIGIC IV? DIGIC III just came out. New image processing engines usually get released on top of the line cameras.
1MP 3" LCD? ya sure (that'd be nice though)
The 40D is one year old. They do 1.5 year product cycles. 5D is up for replacement and will probably be announced at Photokina.
Hardly. That's a massive jump in image size with a new processor. ISO 12800 is also a big bump if it's usable. Might not be a big deal for a bitter 40D owner bur anyone still on a 20 or 30D it's a far better upgrade than the 40D was when it came out. Really makes buying a 1Dmk3 seem silly right now. Pricing info? Release date?Quote:
Originally Posted by grapedrink
Hoax? Maybe but it looks legit.
looks good to me
think about this:
with sRAW, you could 7.5 mp shots at ISO 12800, on an APS sensor
other than only AF points, this pretty much matches the d300
Well hopefully this means the overly long rumored 5d MarkII, 3d, 7d, or whatever it is rumored to be nowadays will be out soon. Nikon has been in the spotlight for good reason lately and I'm looking forward to see Canon's next move.
Yo Buddy--Quote:
Originally Posted by truth
I'd say the biggest motivator(s) in buying the 1DMkIII would be the FPS (you just can't beat 10 FPS), autofocus (even though we know this had issues in the beginning) and the weather sealing on the 1 series bodies. Seems like megapix used to be a bigger motivator for me, but the 10 mp are also a bit deceiving on the MkIII as it's sensor is 60% larger than on the 40D (and 50D).
Even though the 50D sounds like a great camera (and the 40D was sweet as well), it still can't do battle with the 1 series for those looking to shoot action sports or anything fast paced legitimately.
I know you're right, but as a business decision think about how long it takes to make the 1dmk3 pay off vs a 40 or 50d. I know how long it took you to make the leap and your images are top shelf. It still amazes me that you've been under the radar for as long a you have. My point was that if those stats are spot on for the 50d it's a pretty big leap at the prosumer price range for Canon. 6.5 fps is pretty quick (think about how many great images you've made with the 30d) and given the bump in mp, it's impressive compared to the 40d.Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzle6
If I was a full blown pro right now I'd be thinking long and hard about ditching Canon completely. The D3 is a wicked bad ass machine that's high ISO performance is just retarded crazy good. Hopefully Canon can respond but it's gonna be a while before they do. It'll be interesting to see what the 5dmk2 looks like.
FYI: I think you should trade the 40d + $ for my 85mm F/1.2L II
Yeah buddy. For many years I thought I would be fine with the 40D series bodies for shooting action. Last year was the first year where I felt like I had a pretty good image (on any particular day), but had I been shooting with a camera that was just a bit quicker, I would've had a stellar image. Not as much an excuse as it is a realization. I was happy with what I was getting, but not completely satisfied that it was the best I could do. I paid $3,750 for a brand new MkIII. Realistically, I could make that back in two or three images licensed to the right client. Here's to hoping that actually happens...
And you've got a mighty good point about Nikon--were I not so invested in Canon glass, I would be thinking long and hard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzle6
Oh I know you can, I was talking about myself. ;)
Where was the $3750 price from?
why in the world would anyone buy a 1dmk3 at this point, why spend any money much less $3,750 on a product that has been plagued with problems since day one (that are still unresolved)? if i was shooting a ton of sports and i was heavily invested in canon glass i'd just buy a 1dmk2n and wait for the next 1d. otherwise nikon is a no brainer.. and whats so great about the 50d? no weather sealing, same 9 point AF, less fps than the 40D, small buffer.. its basically a 40d with more megapixels, likely at the expense of little or no noise improvement.
I bought it off a guy on FredMiranda.com. As for the reasoning in buying the MkIII, I'm willing to take my chances at this point as this body was produced in March of this year. I have talked to a number of guys that love their MkIII. There are also a number of people that have been unhappy--guess I'll just have to find out for myself.
It's also an issue of timing for me as I'm preparing to go full-time here in October, and would prefer to buy the camera now before it comes straight out of my living income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzle6
I've had a similar realization recently, and have been contemplating selling off my 5D and 40D in favor of a MkIII.
My issue is that the 40D has not been much better at shooting action than the 5D. I thought the 6.5fps would have changed my shooting, but in reality the 40D has the same (or very similar) AF system as the 5D: 9 points of AF, but really only the center point is reliable for tracking action, which awkwardly limits how you compose the image if you are trying to shoot tight.
I've realized that when you are tracking a moving subject, it doesn't matter how many FPS the camera can fire off UNLESS it can maintain focus throughout each frame, and the 40D has disappointed me in that regard.
That being said, the 40D is useful in that it turns my 70-200 into an effective 100-300 f/2.8 zoom. Slap the 24-70 on the 5D, and you are good to go for just about anything, so long as it's not raining...
sorry didnt realise you'd already bought it, would have kept my mouth shut otherwise.. no need to defend your purchase.. but since we're on the topic (for others still debating what to buy)Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzle6
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/olymp...-the-line.aspx
"Personally I am quite happy with my photo take from here, although I am very disappointed with the performance, or lack thereof, of some of my Canon gear. The fact that many integral moments and photos were missed entirely because of camera malfunctions, has made me really reconsider, as many of the sportsshooters in the industry, if I should make the switch to black lenses."
aren't all the focus points on the 40d cross type at f5.6 vs only the center one at f2.8 on the 5d? that sucks that its no better at tracking.. it should be, in theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by dipstik
The theoretical 50D is supposed to have the same AF suite as the 40: 9 f/5.6 cross sensors with the center being a precision sensor for f/2.8.
I remember my EOS-3 (1998) had 45AF points with 9 cross sensors, 8 were f/2.8 sensors and the center was precision at f/4, cross f/5.6 and still a horizontal at f/8! And ECF was the shit.
Actual AF sensors don't seem to have progressed much... just processor speed. Anyone remember the fucking terrible AF suites that they stuck on the early Canon DSLRs? I mean 21st century DSLRs with AF sensors from 1980s cameras. It was so Ghey.
To be honest, I've found the AF on my 40D to be FAR quicker than my 5D. I feel like I'm shooting with molasses when trying to shoot action on my 5D, which is fine cause it just wasn't really built for that. I've found that with a bit of practice, the AF on my 40D has produced better and better images, even using focusing zones other than the center one. More specifically in skiing, I have tried to begin tracking the subject as early as possible to give the AF the best chance of locking focus before I start clicking the shutter--most of the time using AI Servo.
Congrats!Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzle6
It's funny but true that most people definitely slow down their camera equipment purchases when they first start shooting fulltime. Just can't be spending all the money you make on photos to buy gear when it's now supposed to pay for things like rent and food. :D
Are you going ahead with opening a gallery?
Thanks man. The gallery is definitely on hold at the moment. Definitely a viable option in the future, but I seem to be selling prints fairly well without the overhead and stress of a gallery right now. Still a dream of mine, and hopefully five years from now, I'll be sending notices for the grand opening!
I personally know three pro motorsports photogs that switched from Canon to Nikon when the D3 was introduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by grapedrink
That's all they've been waiting for...the past several years...a good high ISO Nikon.
Oh, and this pic just about sums it up:
http://www.caborian.com/wp-content/u...08/canikon.jpg
Huh - looks about 50/50 now.
Pretty soon I'll be asking the 5D vs D700 question, since I'm starting from scratch.
http://gizmodo.com/5041734/canon-eos...ic-4-processor
Body is $1399
Who da man now bishes?
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08...anoneos50d.asp
AF micro adjustment for up to 20 different lens.
That's a nice added feature on this level of camera.
I've got a 30D, and its been great abusing the hell out of the thing learning how to shoot. Honestly, I'd rather save up some cash and go for a full frame setup like the 5D or MKIII before getting a 50D. But I'm just a prosumer, so what do I know.
With 40Ds available in the $700-$900 ranger, the extra $600 for a 50D doesn't seem worth it until we see real reviews (from dpreview) proving that the 50D lives up to its claimed stats (because the 40D didn't) and that its new sensor is up to snuff in noise and sensitivity.
So from the looks of it still no improvments to the weather sealing or lack there of?
Agreed 100% but I wouldn't be rushing out to buy a 40d right now either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
Better yet, I think I may spend my money on some nice pieces of glass before I get a MkIII. ;)
That's always the better choice. Glass > bodyQuote:
Originally Posted by skier666
WTF? What is wrong with Canon? They just released the 40D last fall, are they trying to kill the used market on purpose?
I don't really see the point of the 50D... but that's just me, whatever.
Astro, if you watch footage of the indoor sports you'll notice that Canon led the way in a lot of the gymnastic events and others like it. Just something I noticed.
New 5D body??
http://www.canon.com/moon/en/index.html
http://www.canon-europe.com/
Spooky shit!
Sure seems that way.
Come on, baby... I need this to drop so that the price of the current 5d bodies starts tumbling....
Betcha they come out with an answer to the whole live view/HD movie thing Nikon started, just in a full-frame cam. Since I don't care about any of that BS I'll just pick the low-hanging fruit that's sweeter IMHO.
Amen. I'd love to pick up an even cheaper 5D...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tippster