The Canon 5D MK III is here.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Hey there photo nerds. We’re all in this together and today Canon just added more fuel to the HdDSLR fire – the much-anticipated Canon 5D MK III is here. They made some interesting choices on pixel count, recording modes, etc. So let’s review the skinny of it all.

Here’s some highlighted specs:
_22.3MP Full-Frame CMOS Sensor
_3.2″ Clear View High Resolution LCD
_DIGIC 5+ Image Processor
_61-Point High Density AF
_Full HD 1080/30p and 720/60p Formats
_Built-In HDR and Multiple Exposure Modes
_Extended ISO Range (50-102400)
_Up to 6.0 FPS Continuous Still Mode Shooting
_Dual CF and SD Memory Card Slots
_Magnesium-Alloy Construction

The curve balls for the people I’m talking to? The no 1080 at 60p. Please note I HAVE NOT touched one of these cameras – unlike Nikon, Canon doesn’t trust me with a 10-foot pole and I get no advance copies of these cameras.

The look? She’s small and sleek. Click thru a range of images of the camera via the above tabs.

Now, not unlike what I’ve done with the recent launch of the Nikon D800 and Nikon D4…rather than me spouting off about having played with the system or telling you what your feelings about this system should be, I’m turning the tables back to you. What’s your take? Love, hate, indifferent? Insights? I know that Canon folks, including, ahem, Chuck Westfall read this blog, so your comments on this post – glowing or otherwise – might help inform Canon and the rest of the camera manufacturers about what your thinking…

Link to all the Canon 5D MK III details and/or purchase here via B&H.

This camera is good. It’s what it suppose to be at it’s price points.

For all those pixel addicts out there who view Pixel Count as the sole metric for judging whether a camera is worthy or not: Here’s your chance to eat crow and just realize that for most people, anything over 10mp, is ‘enough’. (I’m NOT saying I want a LOW pixel count; I just know what is the Min I need)

Canon is just going the way Nikon gone with the D700. Even BEFORE the D700, Canon used this belief on their G series. From the G9’s 12mp, to their G10, G11, G12’s 10mp.

Low pixel count on an equal size sensor = better performance in low light.

Canon’s G10 dropped to 10mp. Nikon’s D700 was 12mp with Super Natural, Alien technology low light performance. Canon, in my opinion, is just working on image quality now that the industry has ended it’s pixel count race.

Look at the computer industry. There is a conscious effort by Win computer makers to NOT advertise mhz/ghz in for their core. For the common folks, internet, movie streaming, typing a email, 2.6ghz doesn’t feel any different than a 3.2ghz.

In photography, a 5×5 image made from a 14mp doesn’t feel must different from an 18mp. A 22mp image in a 4×6 doesn’t feel any different than 18mp in a 4×6.

Last point, again, this is my opinion. For Canon users who felt Canon ‘betrayed them’ for offering a 22mp and 500.00 more over the Nikon D800’s 36mp and 2,999.00 price:

Canon did not ‘betray’ you. You (no one specific) may think “the Digic5 sensor can push a million 22mp images per second through it’s system; but, isn’t it?”

Simple answer: Why should it? For the price point, the 5dm3 “is what it’s suppose to be”. The moment Canon does that, it will skew the market place. It will cannibalize sales of their upper end models. It will require a faster mem card writer than what’s on the market. It will skew the pricing upward.

I believe, the pro/serious enthusiast market has plateau with the D800/5dm3. Anything else beyond these models will be smaller incremental upgrades. The only way there will be a huge upgrade for a D900/5dm4 is that there is some physics/chemistry/material break through…such as a quantum sensor, similar to quantum computing.

(allow me to indulge my ass a bit, I love science and speculative fiction)
Quantum sensor, like film but even better. Instead of ‘molecular’ “pixel” on a piece of celluloid (film neg/pos), with it’s ‘infinite’ pixels (because it’s molecular chemistry, film that is); a quantum sensor can have truly INFINITE resolution and can employ interferometer (such as telescopes).

INTERFEROMETER can feed a crap load of metadata with each image. That metadata can be many gigs. This metadata will contain 3d space information…and WITHOUT any specialized equipment, can create a true 3D image all in your consumer level camera.

Interferometer info from quantum sensors, it’s individual pixels can “see around” slight curves of a 3d subject. The 3Ding is only the surface of what a Quantum Sensor can do. It could be the most practical; the other use of quantum sensors are mostly used in science/engineering applications.

Newton would need to change his pants after contemplating the above possibilities.

154 replies on:
The Canon 5D MK III is here.

James Erin de Juaregui says:

March 2, 2012 at 2:02 pm

Ha! Photo nerd is the perfect phrase for these conversations. Shooting stills at weddings or other events, this will be great. Finally a pro level AF and even better lowlight performance. For other areas of photography, sure it isn’t a “game changer”, but shouldn’t you be happy about that? It means that the MkII will be sold at a great price, and/or you won’t feel the need to upgrade your gear right away. I don’t feel the need to upgrade my film cameras every three years, so it is nice not to feel that way about the 5D. As for the D800 vs the 5DmkIII, well… You’re just being a photo nerd.
peter in Cleveland says:

March 2, 2012 at 1:56 pm

This camera is good. It’s what it suppose to be at it’s price points.

For all those pixel addicts out there who view Pixel Count as the sole metric for judging whether a camera is worthy or not: Here’s your chance to eat crow and just realize that for most people, anything over 10mp, is ‘enough’. (I’m NOT saying I want a LOW pixel count; I just know what is the Min I need)

Canon is just going the way Nikon gone with the D700. Even BEFORE the D700, Canon used this belief on their G series. From the G9’s 12mp, to their G10, G11, G12’s 10mp.

Low pixel count on an equal size sensor = better performance in low light.

Canon’s G10 dropped to 10mp. Nikon’s D700 was 12mp with Super Natural, Alien technology low light performance. Canon, in my opinion, is just working on image quality now that the industry has ended it’s pixel count race.

Look at the computer industry. There is a conscious effort by Win computer makers to NOT advertise mhz/ghz in for their core. For the common folks, internet, movie streaming, typing a email, 2.6ghz doesn’t feel any different than a 3.2ghz.

In photography, a 5×5 image made from a 14mp doesn’t feel must different from an 18mp. A 22mp image in a 4×6 doesn’t feel any different than 18mp in a 4×6.

Last point, again, this is my opinion. For Canon users who felt Canon ‘betrayed them’ for offering a 22mp and 500.00 more over the Nikon D800’s 36mp and 2,999.00 price:

Canon did not ‘betray’ you. You (no one specific) may think “the Digic5 sensor can push a million 22mp images per second through it’s system; but, isn’t it?”

Simple answer: Why should it? For the price point, the 5dm3 “is what it’s suppose to be”. The moment Canon does that, it will skew the market place. It will cannibalize sales of their upper end models. It will require a faster mem card writer than what’s on the market. It will skew the pricing upward.

I believe, the pro/serious enthusiast market has plateau with the D800/5dm3. Anything else beyond these models will be smaller incremental upgrades. The only way there will be a huge upgrade for a D900/5dm4 is that there is some physics/chemistry/material break through…such as a quantum sensor, similar to quantum computing.

(allow me to indulge my ass a bit, I love science and speculative fiction)
Quantum sensor, like film but even better. Instead of ‘molecular’ “pixel” on a piece of celluloid (film neg/pos), with it’s ‘infinite’ pixels (because it’s molecular chemistry, film that is); a quantum sensor can have truly INFINITE resolution and can employ interferometer (such as telescopes).

INTERFEROMETER can feed a crap load of metadata with each image. That metadata can be many gigs. This metadata will contain 3d space information…and WITHOUT any specialized equipment, can create a true 3D image all in your consumer level camera.

Interferometer info from quantum sensors, it’s individual pixels can “see around” slight curves of a 3d subject. The 3Ding is only the surface of what a Quantum Sensor can do. It could be the most practical; the other use of quantum sensors are mostly used in science/engineering applications.

Newton would need to change his pants after contemplating the above possibilities.
Paul says:

March 2, 2012 at 1:45 pm

I must say that I am disappointed with the direction Canon is taking for my type of photography. I am currently using the Canon 1Ds Mark III and prior to that the 1Ds Mark II and the 1Ds. I primarily shoot Landscape/Nature and Architecture and I have been looking forward to some upgraded features and more/better MP’s. With the current offerings there is not a reasonable upgrade path for me. I will be looking into the Nikon D800 or a medium format option in the future. Maybe even a forthcoming Sony?
Randell John says:

March 2, 2012 at 1:42 pm

I’m not really impressed, I thought Canon would have added a second CF card slot and not SD. Way too pricy at the moment and I’ll be sticking with my 5D Mkii’s. for the time being at least.
1. dim says:
  
  March 4, 2012 at 2:05 am
  
  SD is a direct link in a mac book pro, I like it that way!
  D
nsiltane says:

March 2, 2012 at 1:40 pm

I think the mkIII is a true improvement. Autofocus was by far the biggest issue on 5DmkII. Let’s hope that this finally enables shooting moving objects as well 🙂 It’ll be interesting to see how this compares with D800, especially considering low light performance.
I just wonder when we’ll see some proper 10- or 12-bit video codec like ProRes on a DSLR. H.264 is good for distribution but really can’t deliver the depth needed for post production. RED Scarlet is pushing in from the other direction, though.