Canon launches top-end prosumer EOS 5D Mark III

Troy Coleman
05 March 2012, 10:44 AM


The prosumer DSLR market just got a little more crowded, with Canon's EOS 5D Mark III set to hit the market by the end of the month, but we hope you've been saving your pennies.


This year marks Canon's 75th anniversary, and last Friday the company marked the occasion with the official announcement of its latest iteration in the prosumer range, the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, with which we managed to have a nice, little hands-on play.



The EOS 5D Mark III comes some five years after its Mark II predecessor and features a 6 frames-per-second, 22.3-megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor with the new DiG!C 5+ processor and boasting a 100-25600 ISO range. What this boils down to is better image quality in a greater range of lighting environments, the greatest advances being in low-lit environments, which for our money is where Canon's greatest competition, Nikon, excels.

The improved low-lighting functionality is indeed wonderful, but Canon's focus with the Mark III is clearly in indie filmmaking, with the only other significant improvement to still imaging being the addition of in-camera HDR. (Probably not a feature we'd actually use, considering the greater level of control in managing your bracketed images in post.)

However filmmakers will rejoice, with new inclusions such as an audio jack and in-camera levelling; features we're certain will make every indie filmmaker dump their current jury-rigged setup and pay attention. It definitely is a sexy setup.

The downside? The hefty price point, with users looking to upgrade their current kit facing an RRP in the vicinity of $4,000 for the body alone when it hits the street in late March. There'll also be a standard lens kit SKU as well as a premium version, but Canon wouldn't commit to any solid pricing as yet. And really, pricing is the biggest challenge here for consumers; how much of a value proposition is the Mark III when it's almost twice the cost of its predecessor? Let us know what you think.



Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Denboy0 (New user):

The R.R.P.of the Mk iii will mean the difference between upgrading or holding onto existing kit. The suggested R.R.P. floating around will certainly deter myself, however I will wait to see whats on offer online. I hate to say it, but if retailers in Australia do not match overseas online shops then they will miss out.

05 March 2012, 2:03 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply
05 March 2012, 2:06 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ss-rotel (User):

cost aside, you wouldn't upgrade from a MkII to a MkIII would you?

More Pixel's cramed into a sensor without decent processing will hurt quality. Tends to get noisy. i'm sure this isn't the case with current day

I Still run a 350D and the only reason i'd upgrade would be 1080P video record.

Back to the price thou... Digital Camera Wharehouse is pretty much the best place buy gen equipment, (there are a few other places that are a little cheaper, but they are grey imports), and they list the MkIII @ $4199. Makes me think that for release, it's price protected and will be for a while.

Mind you, if you had the money for a 5D MkIII you'd spend the extra 900 and buy the 1D MkIV... wouldnt you?



05 March 2012, 3:29 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (User):

Quoting ss-rotel:
More Pixel's cramed into a sensor without decent processing will hurt quality.


It hasn't got many more. The mk2 was 21mp, this is 22. Also, remember these are full frame, where the lower models are crop sensors so the pixel sizes are similar.


Quoting ss-rotel:
Mind you, if you had the money for a 5D MkIII you'd spend the extra 900 and buy the 1D MkIV... wouldnt you?


Maybe - They're both very different cameras though. People looking at megapixels will be very disappointed by the 1D series now compared to the 5D and 7D.

05 March 2012, 6:44 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Your Average Joe (User):

Quoting ss-rotel:
if you had the money for a 5D MkIII you'd spend the extra 900 and buy the 1D MkIV... wouldnt you?

Agreed.
A Pro would spend the extra $1K, and an amateur would have to have been suckered by a salesman to buy this camera. So I'm with you ...... Just what is the market that this camera is aimed at?




06 March 2012, 11:10 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ss-rotel (User):

hmmm... The difference between my 350D @ 6mp and the 500D @, what 18mp is substatial on paper, but due to the fact that it's had the sensor cramed, the image on my 350D is still excellent.

i've grown up with and dated a photographer(s), and seen the rise of digital photography. (i'm old). You know, a 6mp image is pretty much the exact dot pitch of a 8x10 glosy? The only reason you'd actually need more than about 10mp in real world if you are printing a HUGE banner.

OR you're cropping the image to zoom in.

anway, that "more pixels cramed into a sensor" statement was a generalization. When the 350D was replaced, the 400D would take a much grainer image, than the 350, and is still one of the best portrait cams out there on a budget.

anyway... i actually did a little research on the mkIII, you get a bigger screen, and you can upgrade the iso to over 102,000. which is bordering night vision capability.

Is it worth the extra $2000 though? maybe. probably not yet. This price i'm sure will drop, but it's new release, and it's expensive.

Oh yeah.. the MkII has a stainless steel boody, were the MkIII and the 1D have a Magnesium alloy body, which is kinda expensive.

TRYING To remember, but isn't the lighter and stronger than stainless?

06 March 2012, 8:21 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user