Introducing the Canon 5D Mark III
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
G
gagewashere
Guest
LetTheRightLensIn said:
Hey guys--
new here, was wondering, can anyone explain why something as powerful as the 5DMKIII or the D800 can't shoot 1080p 60FPS, but the Sony A77 model shoot's that fine? Considering they're way less powerful in both processing speeds and overall specs, they're not even comparable. So why can't a 3500/3000 camera line up meant for video do that?
Upvote
0
gagewashere said:
Because it will cannibalise sales of the c300 and/or upcoming cinemaEOS [/cynical]
Upvote
0
Re: Introducing the Canon 5D Mark III: jpeg samples
There also appears to be some "chunkiness" or blurring in some subjects, and the blue sky near the waterline appears to have chroma noise blotches.
The tiger picture surprises me a bit for two reasons - one, it doesn't seem as "sharp" as I would have expected from that lens. The shadow areas (the dark greens, at least) appear very good though, much better than I would expect to get at 3200 from my 7D for sure.
In the ISO 800 shot, I see the stars are leaving a very slight trail, so that they appear a bit teardrop-shaped (motion diagonally, between a 10-11 o'clock position to a 4-5 o'clock one, roughly). This is likely due to some camera movement (at a wide lens setting, and only 8 seconds, there is not enough time for the rotation of the earth to become visible, I would think...maybe I could play with the Stellarium planetarium software a bit to figure out for sure).bvukich said:
There also appears to be some "chunkiness" or blurring in some subjects, and the blue sky near the waterline appears to have chroma noise blotches.
The tiger picture surprises me a bit for two reasons - one, it doesn't seem as "sharp" as I would have expected from that lens. The shadow areas (the dark greens, at least) appear very good though, much better than I would expect to get at 3200 from my 7D for sure.
Upvote
0
N
necator
Guest
Really, I'm not impressed with the provided sample-shots from canon.jp---like always.
But most probably they are from pre-release firmware-versions and in-camera jpgs (so bettery quality has to be awaited). On the other hand I constantly wonder, why they (canon, as well as nikon) are not able to deliver pictures that show what their cams are capable of.
In the ISO 3200+ (I only looked at those) you clearly see the noise-reduction at heavy work.
But also in a photographic manner they are not the best: The Bride-Photos have a strong Orange-Cast (Manual WB needed?) and the Tiger photo is considerably too dark.
Cone on Canon, you can do better.
But most probably they are from pre-release firmware-versions and in-camera jpgs (so bettery quality has to be awaited). On the other hand I constantly wonder, why they (canon, as well as nikon) are not able to deliver pictures that show what their cams are capable of.
In the ISO 3200+ (I only looked at those) you clearly see the noise-reduction at heavy work.
But also in a photographic manner they are not the best: The Bride-Photos have a strong Orange-Cast (Manual WB needed?) and the Tiger photo is considerably too dark.
Cone on Canon, you can do better.
Upvote
0
N
necator
Guest
According to here:MazV-L said:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Specifications
X-Sync is 1/200s
Upvote
0
G
GND
Guest
lclevy said:
MaGiL said:
Image portfolio in the latter complements the former.
Astonishing image quality samples undisputably far better than the MkII, sheer joy to have such power at hand for the price, over and above the term "enthusiast's level", I'm glad they didn't fall for the megapixel race, I'm ordering one before they change their mind and give us back the MkII!
Upvote
0
- Status
