C*non with the 5d MKII dashes hopes

[k100d]

i'll echo my comments from the other 5D post

nice things
i. Upgraded Environmental Sealing. When i saw that "Environmental Sealing" was listed, I checked the 50D and it had the same terms so I assumed it would be the same. it looks like the 5D goes a step further although it's not clear to what extent
ii. a more well thought out of video mode. compressed movies, microphone input, AWB, autofocus, 1080P
iii. 21 MP downgraded would give Nikon a run for their money

disappointments
i. i think my disappointment arose that this product seems to exist more to cutoff sony rather than go after Nikon. with a price of $2699 new users who were thinking of the A900 will suddenly stop.
ii. people love the D3/D700 for High ISO, reliable AF system, high FPS and this camera doesn't compete directly with it. the 1DIII seems to be a bit behind as well with the plauging AF issues.
iii. lack of an updated AF module. again this doesn't affect most people but because of this i don't think this will stop the migration to D3 / D700 bodies because of the lack of an upgrade. i'm not 100% sure how good the 5D af was but i don't think it'd be incorrect to say it's nikon good

but canon was brave enough to basically kill their top of the line model. the 1Ds3 is much less relevant today.

[Art Vandelay II]

Originally Posted by RMabo

First, Pentax needs to adress the entry level. Pentax got a lot of criticism for the K200D being not entry level enough. After this, Pentax can adress the upper-market.
We'll have to wait and see what the future K30D and KxD will bring.

I still say entry level is a waste of time unless one of the big box stores will give Pentax some shelf space. I'd rather them make an "entry level" FF camera. That is one a niche that has yet to be exploited...and might actually be successful through online store and small camera shops.

[fejker]

A friend of mine shoots with the 5D and he's telling me that all AF points (except for the center one) don't work right regardless of the lens he uses (he has 17-40L, 24-105L and Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8).
Just to answer your question k100d.

[tcdk]

Originally Posted by Maxington

Well I can understand it, I do still photography, not video, and I really have no desire to pay for a video mode I don't use, nor want a camera brand I might buy from pour R&D time and money into a video mode to keep up with the competiton.

Would you rather your camera had better AF and a brilliant clear image at high ISO, or a video camcorder function?

But that's not the way the world works.

I hear this argument every so often - why are we using any resources at ... better deodorant, faster cars or movie mode in SLR cameras, when there are still people dying from hunger, aids or suffering from diabetes. There's a very simple reason: People are not legos and do not have interchangeable skills.

I'm not saying we allocate and distribute our resources in an efficient manner, but I very much doubt that Cnon not using resources on movie mode would have resulted in any of those things you want, or saved anything meaningful on the final price.

Most of the technology was probably already developed for P&S cameras, and those techies that added it to the D5ii probably specializes in movie codecs and would probably have been sitting idle/gotten fired/wasted time learning something new, if they hadn't worked on movie mode for the D5ii. They probably know nothing about making a better AF or how to optimize a chip for less high ISO noise.

In the same way as you can't take a random auto-engineer and ask him to make a vaccine for AIDS.

Besides, going from "fast AF" to "extremely fast and outstanding AF" probably takes tons and tons of work and expensive high(er) precision hardware (or they would all do it), while going from "no movie" to "no frills movie" is probably comparatively easy (and can probably be done totally in software, adding no extra hardware cost).

As for me. I would love to have a movie mode in my SLR. Sometimes I carry my P&S around, beside the SLR, just so that I can take small movies. Mostly of the kids.

[Gooshin]

Originally Posted by fejker

A friend of mine shoots with the 5D and he's telling me that all AF points (except for the center one) don't work right regardless of the lens he uses (he has 17-40L, 24-105L and Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8).
Just to answer your question k100d.

none of my AF points on my Pentax except the center one work either, cuz i turn it off!

[Art Vandelay II]

Originally Posted by Gooshin

none of my AF points on my Pentax except the center one work either, cuz i turn it off!

Same here. Perhaps if I were a sports photographer I would care about number of AF points, but until I start getting sideline tickets at NFL games on a regular basis I couldn't care less about the number of AF points a camera has as long as the one in the center works.

[deejjjaaaa]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay II

Same here. Perhaps if I were a sports photographer I would care about number of AF points, but until I start getting sideline tickets at NFL games on a regular basis I couldn't care less about the number of AF points a camera has as long as the one in the center works.

I 'd rather have one really tuned for bright lenses and daylight/tungsten conditions and w/ the ability to adjust AF
for daylight/tungsten separately (and differently
for various focus lengths if zoom is used) than the rest 10 in my K20D...

one really good is always better than 11 mediocre.

[fejker]

Don't get me wrong, I don't want more AF points on my Pentax ... the 11-point is great and the position of the AF points is superb compared to other brands. I just want better AF in terms of speed and accuracy.

And I do use at least nine of my AF points constantly - center focus and recomposition just isn't my cup of tea.

[kenyee]

Out of curiosity, anyone know what Canon did to tune four of their focus points specifically for 2.8 lenses? I thought that was a weird thing to mention in their specs.

[dopeytree]

Originally Posted by tcdk

But that's not the way the world works.

I hear this argument every so often - why are we using any resources at ... better deodorant, faster cars or movie mode in SLR cameras, when there are still people dying from hunger, aids or suffering from diabetes. There's a very simple reason: People are not legos and do not have interchangeable skills.

I'm not saying we allocate and distribute our resources in an efficient manner, but I very much doubt that Cnon not using resources on movie mode would have resulted in any of those things you want, or saved anything meaningful on the final price.

Most of the technology was probably already developed for P&S cameras, and those techies that added it to the D5ii probably specializes in movie codecs and would probably have been sitting idle/gotten fired/wasted time learning something new, if they hadn't worked on movie mode for the D5ii. They probably know nothing about making a better AF or how to optimize a chip for less high ISO noise.

In the same way as you can't take a random auto-engineer and ask him to make a vaccine for AIDS.

Besides, going from "fast AF" to "extremely fast and outstanding AF" probably takes tons and tons of work and expensive high(er) precision hardware (or they would all do it), while going from "no movie" to "no frills movie" is probably comparatively easy (and can probably be done totally in software, adding no extra hardware cost).

As for me. I would love to have a movie mode in my SLR. Sometimes I carry my P&S around, beside the SLR, just so that I can take small movies. Mostly of the kids.

My friend works as a clinical trialist (monitors clinical trials very well qualified) and she tells me there is a cure for aids just it's so ridiculously expensive no-one will pay to start manufacturing it because they won't make any profit.

Just thought you might like to know

[vizjerei]

Originally Posted by fejker

Don't get me wrong, I don't want more AF points on my Pentax ... the 11-point is great and the position of the AF points is superb compared to other brands. I just want better AF in terms of speed and accuracy.

And I do use at least nine of my AF points constantly - center focus and recomposition just isn't my cup of tea.

Same here, I use select mode. Center mode will result out focus if I am taking pic with big aperture while reframing.

[deejjjaaaa]

Originally Posted by kenyee

Out of curiosity, anyone know what Canon did to tune four of their focus points specifically for 2.8 lenses? I thought that was a weird thing to mention in their specs.

http://doug.kerr.home.att.net/pumpkin/Split_Prism.pdf

at the bottom - but read the whole text...

In some cameras (such as the Canon EOS 20D), at one or more particularly important
AF point locations across the frame (typically the one at the center), two
autofocus detectors are provided, one workable for modest aperture lenses and one
(with a “larger baseline”) workable only for larger aperture lenses. The appropriate
one is put into action based on the maximum aperture reported by the lens in place.
This arrangement exploits the greater precision in focus determination available
with a larger aperture lens in place.

there many other things that can be done for enhance AF - but at least this one WAS NOT DONE BY PENTAX... no optimization for <= 2.8 lenses... enjoy SAFOX the VIII

[séamuis]

Originally Posted by Asahiflex

I have seen the 5D MKII samples on Canon EOS 5D Mark II - pierwsze sample i film - Optyczne.pl and frankly I was underwhelmed. But maybe they used a preproduction sample?

I think those images look rather good, especially the portrait. I wonder if there was any PP.

[Mr. The Guy]

Originally Posted by RMabo

Whatever Canon and Nikon releases, Pentax can still make a "killer pro-level".
It seems to me that there is an idea floating around in Pentax forums that Pentax can't make better cameras than Nikon and Canon

I'm sure they can. I, for one, am not willing to pay for it. I want an affordable camera that is not 'crippled' to try to get me to upgrade to a 'pro' version. That's what Pentax has historically done, let's hope they continue to. I would view a 'pro' camera as a cancer. If the 'features' that C&N have are not on a Pentax for 6 months or a year, I don't really care. My interest in specs is zero. I want a camera designed for taking pictures at a reasonable price, not impressing camera forum members.

[roentarre]

Originally Posted by séamuis

yea I was reading about the 'slow' fps and not having 45 AF points... man those canon guys are more lame than some of the spec-droolers over here...

Oh, you do not know the feeling of being verbally bashed with 150 threads from 150 parties!

The crowd is after a magic button that does literally everything in photography.