Well...I kinda agree with him on Dpreview...99% of the people making posts there are idiots.

And its OBVIOUS this guy is deep in Canon's pockets. His blog/review sounded more like a paid advertisement than anything else.

And in his comments (which he shut down because I don't think he can deal with the criticism.)

The first guy to mention Nikon was immediately dismissed, and his question on why would choose this over the D800 was completely ignored.

This guy obviously has a very high rep as a wedding shooter...but all I see is arrogant puts being paid by Canon.

Well, all I can say for you guys is ooooooch.

Yes, he is in Canon's pockets - no doubt. He apparently gave a fair amount of input into its features (according to him). I love, love, love his photography..could take or leave the rest.

I can't say his comments are fair and balanced, just that his review and discussion on the DWF make me want one. He's been very open that he doesn't use Nikon and isn't comparing the MkIII to any of Nikon's lineup..only to other Canon bodies, including the 1DX and former 5D versions. As heavily invested in Canon gear as I am, switching formats would be a huge decision and undertaking, so I'm looking at this very closely.

oh ok. yeah, its a blatant design copy.

And no, I can't disagree with his comments about dpreview users. Trying to sort objective and useful information from the chest-beating, fanboy blowhards is a waste of time.

people are spewing all sorts of garbage about this camera everywhere. I'll reserve judgment until I see real-world photos from real-world photographers.

Sorry..I posted my comment too soon the first time when I had to answer the phone.

:ugh: It's the same every time a new body is released from either side. It's so frustrating. If it's made by any company other than what Joe-Blow-poster shoots with, it's crap, and vice versa.

its not even that.

most of them are so uneducated in what they are claiming to talk about its not even funny.

The comments about mirror less cameras to DSLRs to iPhones (because DPreview.com itself is SOOOOO Apple bias :rolleyes: )...I don't know what I ever bother to peruse the comments...sometimes they make me laugh, half the time I wish Darwin would show up at their homes and put two in their chests and one in the heads.

As it stands alone...I'm sure its a great camera.

But when you compare it to whats its replacing...and what the competition is offering...its a sad state.

As one of my friends who has been drooling for this camera to be announced said, "Its two years behind the curve, way to go Canon."

I gotta agree with him.

They could have released this body 1 year ago, and called it the 5DmkIIs and it would have been a hit.

Today...not so much.

There will always going to be haters within each brand. Kinda like how it is here with Acura :D

Well...much like Acura...Canon just stepped back into the proverbial stone age.

I don't think this camera is 'stone age' material...

compared to the competition they are.

Phenomenal high iso/low light shoot...its about time for you guys...Nikon won that market (and still win it ala D4) for the last two years.

What else...the autofocus. Thats really nice.

But really...thats kinda it when you boil it down the complete basics.

the 5D2 was on par with the D700.

we are not talking about the D3 and D4 here.

I don't either. It actually looks like a fantastic camera. But at more than double the cost of the 7D, I have a hard time justifying the expense. Is it really $2K more camera than the 7D? The most compelling pieces for me are the dual card slots, the full frame sensor, the high ISO performance, and the autofocus.

I'm not sure I want or need any of those features enough to justify the expense. It's not like the MkII is a dud. People make gorgeous images with them. That may be the best route for me.

I wanted this camera, but at $3500... :dunno:

I would've gotten the 5D2, but I enjoy the higher end features of the 1D that the 5D lacked.

The 3 thou has most of them that I like. So :shrug:

No it wasn't. The 5D2 was just the 5D with a bigger sensor.

But we can, because the D700 and the D3 shot pretty much the same when it comes to ISO.

The 5D2 is good, I never jabbed it...but it doesn't touch the D700 in low light.

And for fuck's sake, I wish I could buy an excellent DSLR without paying for the video capabilities. I still hate that. I'm not a videographer. I wish they'd make video optional and cut the price for those of us who don't want it.

Fixed

The 1DX will need a flash too...

All things the competition had 2 years ago. Which is why I say stone age. And for a higher price tag.

Canon...the Honda/Toyota of the camera world...attempting to rest on its laurels rather than innovate and push the envelope.

I honestly don't believe you are paying extra for video anymore. The prices of these bodies would be the same regardless at this point in time.

Yea I mentioned last night how similar the two look.

You are completely wrong. The dynamic range, white balance, and shadow/highlight reproduction of the 5D2 is on the same level as the D700. The 5D is a dinosaur compared to the 5D2, when it comes to those areas.

Canon has had the things I listed for a long time, just not in the more affordable bodies, and it took them way too long to update the AF on the 5D line. I know their ISO capability hasn't been as good as Nikon's because they've been too hung up on MP's, but it's not like it's been crap, either.

I don't think you'll find many who will argue that they've been trailing behind Nikon for a while now, but "stone age" is maybe a wee bit of an exaggeration.

With the huge gap between the 7D and 5DIII now...they really need to position something to fill it.

dpreview's review states the 5D2 is "ALMOST" as good as the D700/D3

Almost

Yeah, I have to agree here, Jeff. Where did your objectivity go?

Yea bigger sensor?

They're both full frame.. :squint:

Never said anything was crap ;)

In the tech world 2 years is an very long time, hence I say stone age.

The 7D will most likely get an update soon enough...unless Canon is listening to the uproar right now and takes it back to the drawing board.

Not when it comes to the 5D2, it was nothing more than a 5D, with the 20D's auto focus system, which was six years old at that time. With some software tweaks to look better. It was Canon's video camera hypebol.

Well it is 12mp vs 21mp :shrug:

There is a huge difference between the sensor in the 5D and the 5D2...perhaps Jeff meant bigger MP.

The huge "mark" huh huh huh of the 5D2 was the inclusion of 1080p video.

But...that said the sensor they switched in that body did have a big overall improvement in resolution and low light vs. 5D.

Okay, okay...as long as you're not calling it crap. ;)

And if you saw the state of my television and sound system, you'd know the true definition of stone age. Truly paleolithic.

I'll be very curious to see what they do for the 7D. For now, I think I need to send my entire kit to Toshio for some calibration and keep on shooting.

That confused me, too. I thought he was smoking crack. :teef:

:popcorn:

Need. Mo'. MONEY. :rofl:

:fluffy:

Yes, there hyberbol, is was of a video camera to them than a camera. They persude video pluses, not still plus'.