Wrote an article about the possible characteristics of the Canon 5D Mark III is it interesting?

Question

Canon

Compared to Nikon's announced D800 full-frame DSLR. Which blog is best?

Nikon D800 Announced, Where's the Canon 5D Mark III?

Almost a week has passed since the announcement of the Nikon D800 full-frame DSLR. Almost everything that the Nikonians have been waiting for for almost a year is embodied in the new flagship of the (semi) professional line of Nikon. The Japanese promise to start selling a new miracle in mid-March. What is believed with a slight creak, after the story of the delay in the release of the D7000.

But what about Canon?

Canon EOS 5D Mark III, the announcement of which has been waiting for at least a long time, has not come out from under the veil of secrecy. In the end, I decided to write it myself. Let's imagine how the manufacturers of belts with a red border can respond to the manufacturers of belts with a yellow border. Given the characteristics of the Nikon D800.

Price

Nikon announced $3000 for the D800 and $3300 for the D800E, maybe the real price will be higher in Russia for sure. The Mark III price tag should be in the same range. It is possible that the price tag will be put a little higher than that of Nikon for marketing reasons (“more expensive means better”).
Probability : $3500 - 50%, $3000 - 30%, <$2500 - 10%, >$4000 - 10%

Specifications.

full frame

Not even discussed. If only because the current semi-professional flagship 5D Mark II is full-frame.

For reference. What is a full- frame (full-matrix) camera and what is its advantage over crops? As the name implies, the physical size of the "full" matrix corresponds to the film frame format, approximately 36x24mm. “Crop” matrices have a smaller size, respectively, with the same megapixels:
- cropped matrices are noisier due to sensor crowding, physically smaller sizes and “better heat transfer” between them.
- more light falls on the full-size matrix, respectively, the "physical" photosensitivity is higher. For example, the difference between the light sensitivity of f1.4 and f2 optics corresponds to a crop factor of 1.4 (usually cropped cameras have a larger crop factor of 1.5-1.7).
- for "crops", the actual focal length of the optics should be multiplied by the crop factor. That is, with a cropped camera, you need to run back about one and a half times further to get the same size in the picture. Accordingly, you can save on short-focus lenses (albeit lost on long-focal, telephoto lenses). The most technologically “simple” and, accordingly, “cheapest” focal length is 50-55mm. When moving away from the optimum, prices rise sharply, especially at high light sensitivity. And they grow more in the "short" side than in the "long" side.

Probability : 99% the camera will be full-frame (1% that Canon will close the full-matrix semi-professional line, stopping at the still current Mark II).

More megapixels

Until now, Canonists with 5D Mark II and 21Mp have looked patronizingly at the Nikon D700 with 12M. In the new camera, Nikon charged 36MP. Almost like a medium format camera.

How many megapixels will the Mark III have? Actually think 25-32. A person who buys a camera for $3000 either understands that the full sensor is more important than formal resolution, or buys a "status thing" (and relies more on the name of the camera, not the characteristics).

And 36 MP is already prohibitive resolution. Why? For some reason, it rests on the possibilities of optics.

Let's count. Optical resolution is calculated in lines per millimeter. Nikon has 7360 dots per 35.9mm matrix, which is a little more than 200 dots, that is, 200 lines per mm.

If the Bayer filter is taken into accountyou need to divide the number of lines by two more. At least on the root of two, as a maximum of two. But still, in the end, we get 100 lines.

Minimum. At least 100 lines, really more.

Believe me, there are few lenses that give such resolution under the " small format ". There is even a suspicion that, having released a camera with such a resolution, Nikon was going to buy a Lake or Zeiss. Which cannot but rejoice, because German optics with Japanese autofocus will appear. Or Leika was going to buy Nikon, which she can’t please, because then Nikon’s cameras will cost the same as Leik’s.

Therefore, there is not much point in 37, 38, and even more so in 40MP. But who knows - marketers rule in this world.

Probability : 20% that the camera will have 36+ megapixels.

Frames per second

The D800 has a relatively low rate of fire - only 4 frames per second (6 when using a battery pack). The reverse side of high resolution.

Making the Mark III faster, at least up to 5 shots per second (20% "faster") is not such a difficult task. Perhaps this is the "cheapest" solution in the "marketing" superiority. Especially if Canon doesn't push megapixels to the skies.

Probability : 80% that there will be more than 4 shots per second

ISO

This is a sore subject for Canon. In low light conditions, Nikon has been out of competition for several years. But there is an ISO that is written in the annotation and there is an ISO that is really working. Therefore, most likely, the necessary numbers will be written on the Mark III box. What is the “working” ISO of what the D800 has, what is the 5D, the tests will show after the release of the cameras.

Probability : 90% that the ISO will be declared no lower than that of the D800

Dynamic Range

It would be nice. Nikon's dynamic range is declared at 20Ev (as a metering range, it's really less, judging by my D7000). Increasing the DD is not easy, but if I succeed, I personally will strongly think whether I really am such a stubborn Nikonian.

For reference. Dynamic range is the difference between the darkest and lightest clearly visible areas of an image. A typical example is a portrait photograph on the beach, where the reflected light from the sand and water completely clogs the details of the background, even if the background falls into the depth of field.

Chance : 25% that the Mark III's range will be wider than the D800's

Ergonomics

It would be time to change the shape of the case a little (at least the grips) and the location of the camera power button so that the camera can be turned on with one hand without looking at it like the Nikons. I see no reason not to do this in the 5D Mark III. All the same, when everything is fine with you (with ergonomics), and everything is fine with the main “enemy”, it is somehow uncompetitive.

Probability : 30% for a change in ergonomics (70% because canon has not been steamed by this for several decades, but maybe it's time?)

Soft

Canon traditionally distributes software for computer control of the camera for free (unlike Nikon, who wants decent money for a simple program). Perhaps in the box there will be something for organizing and pre-processing photos more convenient than the competitor. In the end, selling a camera for 3000 greens can add a license to Silkypix or even Lightroom in the box.

Probability : 80% that there will be better and more diverse software

Shooting video

This is a sore subject for me, so I’ll say right away that the canon had, has and will have an advantage due to two things. First: a smaller working length and a larger bayonet diameter. Because of what, more optics from third-party manufacturers can be installed on Canon, incl. the same Nikon. Second: a great experience in the production of video cameras, moreover, of very high quality for various market segments. What else?

Autofocus for video

It's time. So far, I've seen sane autofocus only in Sony (well, relatively sane and that one on a mirrorless camera). Which is not surprising - a DSLR is not a video camera and the optics are completely different. My D7000 has autofocus…fun and self-contained. But sometimes it helps out when laziness overcomes. With the D800, I doubt that autofocus will be much better. The third brand, respectively, too. But suddenly? It's time.

Probability : 90% autofocus in Liveview mode

Higher resolution and frame rate?

Nikon finally releases a camera for shooting in FullHD with 30 frames in progressive scan, otherwise it’s already tired of falling into the “flicker” of 50 hertz lamps at 25 frames. And 60 frames in HD, which is also very good, fast movements are better “caught”.

How can Canon respond? Actually nothing. Such modes have already passed the stage for him, but ... Higher resolution and higher frame rate are needed by "filmmakers", who are not so many in the general mass of buyers. And for professional video shooting, say FullHD weddings - more than enough. Why movies with 3K or 4K resolution , if it is impossible to watch them at home - there are no such monitors and TVs. And even if they were, it's hard to notice the difference with the naked eye.

Plus, a higher resolution is a competition with ourselves. Canon recently released a digital movie camera . Who will buy it for $15,000 when you can buy a camera for $3000 - $4000. Perhaps the emergence of 2K video, which is slightly larger than FullHD, but can be heralded as a breakthrough.

A large frequency is cool, nothing more. More like a marketing feature for "slow motion" than a sought-after thing. You can make HD with 120 frames, everything else is fantasy.

Probabilities (cross) : HD x 120 - 20%, 2K - 15%, 3K - 10%, 4K - 5%

Compression algorithms

Also from the realm of fantasy is the dream of "filmmakers" about uncompressed video. It is easy to calculate that uncompressed FullHD at 25 frames per second will produce a stream of about 200MB per second (with 4-byte encoding). A 64 GB flash drive will be clogged with three minutes of material, only ... that's where to get a flash drive that holds such a stream and does not try to melt. However, an external output to the Raid array is possible. Possible, but unlikely.

For reference: uncompressed video allows for more "sweeping" color correction, or other post-processing, which is affected by encoding artifacts.

But a new codec or an upgrade of the old one is quite possible.

Probabilities (cross) : uncompressed - 5%, new codec - 25%

Special effects "on the carcass"

Canon did not seem to be seen in such a disgrace. For which respect to him, but again, marketing, and what if someone wants 3D transitions between movies right on the camera.

Probability : 10% (and good)

Work on bugs

Autofocus misses

Headache for Mark II owners. I caught a frame, looked - everything is clear, confirmation squeaked. You add a descent. Mirror cotton. Opachki, but the focus has gone somewhere. Not that often, but five percent of such a marriage among the "pyataks" is. You can not even mention the usual misses when shooting "flight". As a result, constant shamanism with the settings.

If the Mark III fixes the problem, sales are guaranteed. At least at the expense of the owners of "dvushki". I think Canon understands this very well, so we are waiting.

Chance : 70% that the Mark III will "miss" less

Battery charge

Nikon owners have a problem with charging batteries - remember where the "charging" is lying around. Canon doesn't have this problem. It's a pity. 4-6 hours of active work is very little.

Chance : 30% that Mark III batteries will be more capacious

Epilogue

Here is the prediction. Let's see what we managed to guess.
And while my decision to buy the D800 may not be influenced by many factors (dynamic range, cinematic resolution), I'm still looking forward to the announcement of the Mark III.

Answer 1

Not that.
From the habr section on moderation to the sandbox:
With a high probability they will not pass pre-moderation:
- articles previously published on other sites;
— articles without correctly placed punctuation marks, with emoticons, with an abundance of exclamation marks, highlighting and other conspicuous text formatting;
— reviews of software, hardware, services, etc.;
- Complaints about companies and services provided;
— translations of other articles;
- pieces of program code;
— articles that have nothing to do with IT topics

Answer 2

A smaller focal length, due to which more optics from third-party manufacturers can be put on the canon, incl. Nikon
due to the smaller working length and the larger diameter of the mount, do not confuse)

Answer 3

"Flicker" of 50 hertz incandescent lamps
Can incandescent lamps flicker at a speed of 50 Hz?

Answer 4

Lively article, not dry gossip as usual =) Plusanul and it is quite a place for her in the DSLR blog .

Answer 5

no doubt the camera is very cool, and I look after myself, I even think about a loan, although almost 2 bucks www.e-katalog.ru/CANON-EOS-5D-MARK-II.htm www.e-katalog.ru/CANON-EOS -5D-MARK-II.htm haunt me, I'm not a professional, but an amateur, but I want to be in the trend completely)