Would you buy a 5d mark III now?

[giostrante]

Hi everybody, I'd like to discuss with you my case.

 

I started my digital dslr experience with a Nikon d40 only for photo, then I switched to canon 7d for the video mode, later to a 5d mark II and last year I switched again to Nikon d800 cause I was tired of the horrible, soft and muddy look of the canons, tired of the colors and of the fact that the 90% of the images around the web were all the same, cause everybody used Canon. And the 5d mark III at that time didn't change  anything, the video mode was even more soft and muddy than the mark II, just better for high iso. So considering that I always used and I'm still using old nikon ai-s lenses for video (with adapter on canons) I chose the nikon for the best sharpness and dynamic range despite a worst iso performance, and I was satisfied with the results. 

But this was before the magic lantern raw revolution.

 

Now, I've waited a year the gh4 and the new sony alpha, cause I really like the idea of small and light camera body and lenses, and the video modes are amazing but for serious photo work the mirrorless are still too slow, they are not good for every type of photography like a real dslr, not yet.

 

From the other side this magic lantern raw hack make me crazy, the video images are absolutely a bless, and the possibility in post processing are huge, the workflow is still a pain but the results are outstanding. And you still have a proper dslr in the hands, one of the best.

 

But for photo I still prefer the nikon look, the incredible power of the d800 sensor, the ability to recover blacks without color noise, the dynamic range, the grain, almost everything is better in the nikon for me, but the raw video is a mirage. 

I'm a follower of nikon hacker project which is great, but I honestly think that they'll never find the rabbit in the hat, no raw magician, there will never be a trick. They are few guys with few resources, too complicated. A raw video mode for the d800 will blow out of the water every canon model, 1dc included, I'm sure about this, but it's a pure fantasy, sadly.

 

At the moment my natural choice can only be a 5d mark III, but who knows what will come in the next photokina (september 2014)? If comes out some new d800s with 4k and all the other super marvellous feature of this recent cameras I'll die! It would be a serious concern for me, a real epic fail!

 

So the question is simple, would you buy a 5d mark III now? Or would you wait the end of this year at least?

 

(sorry for my english!!)

 

 

 

 

[QuickHitRecord]

If you value a large sensor and raw over 4K resolution and workflow, then absolutely.

[Darktide Media]

I can say that without a doubt the new GH4 is a great camera, I got my hands on one at NAB and the auto focus is up there with the best of them. The 5D for video is so-so.  I had one and sold it. Moved to the GH3 at the time and learned what an amazing camera it was. It lacked in AF for me at action sport photos but other then that it was great. The GH4 is faster, not a lot but it can hold on to a subject better. I would wait till the end of the month to see reviews on the new camera then go from there. 

[fuzzynormal]

At the moment my natural choice can only be a 5d mark III

 

You figured it out.  

 

Also, if you wait for the next "best" thing in cameras, you'll always be waiting.  Assuming that you want to actually make stuff in the meantime just get something and use it.

 

Almost all cameras create really good images these days if you know what you're doing.  Make stuff and have fun.

[etidona]

So the question is simple, would you buy a 5d mark III now? 

Absolutely not. Save your money for something useful!

[HurtinMinorKey]

You might want to wait until the end of the year. There is always a chance that Canon might do something awesome with raw in the 7Dii, but i'm becoming increasingly pessimistic about it. 

 

You also might want to try renting the 5D and seeing if you like(or can handle) the raw workflow. 

[maxotics]

i have a Nikon d600, for the same reasons you do.  I too have considered selling all my equipment for a 5d3.  I then did the math. I buy most cameras used, but will use new prices for this analysis.   5d3 body, $3,400.  New D610, $1,900, difference, $1,500.  With that one can buy a BMPCC and lens.  So that's what I did.  I bought the BMPCC new and a used 14.45 for $170.  

 

The camera is small.  The big benefit is it is made ONLY TO SHOOT RAW, so it makes that as easy as possible (though it's still RAW).  I can shoot Prores HQ with audio and get it into my NLE in no time.  File sizes are smaller than ML because of basic compression.  No compression in ML Canon.  With Canon cameras you need very expensive CF cards and though I believe they can record audio now too, I bet there are issues.  

 

Every other day I think about selling my BMPCC.  It has nothing to do with the camera.  Video, in general, is a big distraction for photography, for me.  There is a high probability that you would get the 5d3 and shoot RAW only once or twice.  

 

So my advice is to get the BMPCC (which wasn't available with I started with RAW on a Canon 50d) and see if you want to do more video.  Even if you end up selling and take a few hundred dollar loss it will be well worth it.  

 

Also, with adapters you can use your Nikon glass on the BMPCC.  The only problem is it has 3x crop factor.  That's a drag ;)

[mtheory]

Northlight is suggesting EOS M3 and 7D2 in Q3 as well as the mythical new EOS 3D in Q4 this year. ( The 3D is also a possible codename for 5D4 ). Regardless of whether these camera will come out or not, I feel that filmmakers already have everything they need for 2K and 4K shooting ( BM, Panasonic, Sony, 5D3, Kinefinity ), anything extra would be a nice cherry on top, but no longer game changing. 

[Quirky]

 

So the question is simple, would you buy a 5d mark III now? 

 

 

Nope.

 

 

 

Or would you wait the end of this year at least?

 

It depends. If I had an urgent need for a new camera, I wouldn't wait for the end of the year. Otherwise I might wait. Not for 5D3 or some other Canikon dSLR, though. But your personal preferences and your budget may be different.

Your life, your money, your decision.

[Rudolf]

I would say in first place it depends on what you are going to do with the camera...

I have a GH3 and an OMD em5 which are absolutely enough for my needs (my customers don't have an idea of 4k and raw) - I don't

produce big stuff just for the web and some corporate stuff.

 

But when I want to make something special I grab one of my filmcameras choose appropriate stock and decide carefully on my motiv, subject, cinematography. That is a totally different approach and absolutely worth a consideration. Sometimes I have got the feeling the people who film are much more focussed on an artistic and creative work rather then tech-specs. And keep in mind for film you get a 100 year "warranty" (good storage needed)  :)

[Somnang]

I currently have a 5d3, and also BMPCC, but I'm starting to look at the new cameras coming out (GH4, a7s, Kinemini 4k)... and maybe BMPC 4k. I mainly use 5d3 for ML raw -- it's the main reason why I'm fighting myself on whether or not to get one of the new cameras. ML raw is incredible and hard to beat for it offers. Having said that, I'm waiting on the comparison between 5d3 raw vs GH4 4k to come out. 

[JESEOS CHRIST]

 

So the question is simple, would you buy a 5d mark III now? Or would you wait the end of this year at least?

 

 

Just get the 5DIII, or something else that's readily available.

If the speculation is to be believed, and Canon doesn't release anything until late 2014/early 2015, while also factoring in the innevitable ML hack for that camera, it may not be until May 2015 that you see a fully optimized successor to the 5DIII. While patience is a virtue, putting your dreams/visions on hold for a year for something like that is a sin.

 

It's still no guarantee that the 5DIII successor will be worth it, because as more cameras become available and more accessible within than time, the next Canon will appear as more of a "me too" camera than a "hey look what I can do differently" camera.

 

I'd like to be wrong on this, because I have nothing but Canon lenses.

However, it's become evident to me Canon's primary objective is not to step on any other major camera company's toes.

They're comfortable with their place in the digital imaging Oligarchy of planned obsolescence, and wouldn't want to do anything that might rock the boat, like actually innovate and improve.

[giostrante]

The GH4 is faster, not a lot but it can hold on to a subject better. I would wait till the end of the month to see reviews on the new camera then go from there. 

 

Yes and no, it's of course better than the gh3, but I don't think it can match a proper dslr for photo, especially a full frame.

 

 So my advice is to get the BMPCC (which wasn't available with I started with RAW on a Canon 50d) and see if you want to do more video.  Even if you end up selling and take a few hundred dollar loss it will be well worth it.  

 

Also, with adapters you can use your Nikon glass on the BMPCC.  The only problem is it has 3x crop factor.  That's a drag  ;)

 

That's interesting, I could drop from d800 to d610 and invest in a bmpcc (and a speed booster in the future), which is a real video camera with the benefit of the raw and the prores HQ also, great idea! 

I've just seen some comparisons and I prefer the look of the black magic over the canon, it's more flat, more natural, the 5d has always that "blu-magenta-contrasted" look, I can't explain well, is something proper of the canon image, something more digital and less filmic, it's in the stills and in the video files also, h264 and raw too. 

Is a personal taste of course, but is there, I can easily see it looking at the borders of a subject, I think is a mix of sharpness, contrast, latitude and colours, simply canon doesn't have the image quality that nikon and the black magic have, it's different, worst for me, look at the sample below.

Anyway with this solution I could still have my beloved nikon look for pictures and a new powerful and proper tool for video, awesome! 

Definitely goodbye 5d! Thanks for the idea!

 

 

 

 

[dafreaking]

If it drops down to to the price of the GH4, then maybe. And that too to supplement the GH4, using it for low light and RAW. 

[Christina Ava]

it depends on the use, and on the overall equipment you have, i have invested in canon so all my equipment is best matched with my mark 3

lenses extra batteries,mods, also im used to the ergonomics, which i think they are great! 

 

if you are a semi-pro i think the mark 3 is an awesome tool, 

if you shoot weddings like me the mark 3 is gold,

I have no use for 2k or 4k footage in weddings, it would just make things more difficult, time consuming..

 

if you shoot commercials then i think its worth going GH4 and 4k

if you shoot docs then again go for the gh4

 

the mark 3 is a workhorse, for me, and its softness is fair for the faces of people in my line of work, 

 

and if you are an artist go get a mark 2 hack it with ML get some vintage lenses and go wild.

the camera above all is a tool you are the one that makes it work.

 

:D

[giostrante]

it depends on the use, and on the overall equipment you have, i have invested in canon so all my equipment is best matched with my mark 3

lenses extra batteries,mods, also im used to the ergonomics, which i think they are great! 

 

if you are a semi-pro i think the mark 3 is an awesome tool, 

if you shoot weddings like me the mark 3 is gold,

I have no use for 2k or 4k footage in weddings, it would just make things more difficult, time consuming..

 

if you shoot commercials then i think its worth going GH4 and 4k

if you shoot docs then again go for the gh4

 

the mark 3 is a workhorse, for me, and its softness is fair for the faces of people in my line of work, 

 

and if you are an artist go get a mark 2 hack it with ML get some vintage lenses and go wild.

the camera above all is a tool you are the one that makes it work.

 

:D

 

Yes, I shoot also weddings, video and photo, it depends. 

And for video considering the 5d mark III stock mode I prefer the d800 all the way, more detail, more sharpness, better color rendition, lowlight is not always problem, there are always my nikon 50mm 1.8 series E and neat video for that, of course! And in one year of weddings I've never had a problem with moire, it's very rare and anyway difficult to see, especially for the clients!

And considering the d800 lower bit rate I can save various weddings in less hard drive space, even if now I'm using the new hack (64 mbps vs 20 mbps original). That's important for me, is a big factor, with the 5d I would have worst image quality in more space!

I'd rather use tons of gigabytes only for high quality material like raw or prores, not muddy h264!

[jcs]

Canon (and the 5D3) has the nicest color processing in the price range, especially for skintones. In good/bright light, the 5D3 H.264 sharpens nicely and looks really good on a large HDTV at a normal viewing distance. It's very important to use sharp lenses and to nail focus. The 24-105 F4L is ok for closeups, but not so good for anything else (sharpness). The 16-35 F2.8L II, 24-70 F2.8L II, and 70-200 F2.8L II are very sharp and really help the 5D3 H.264 look its best. Nikon and Zeiss primes are also very sharp; the new Sigma 50mm should be spectacular.

Canon L lenses with H.264 (IPB): looks good on HDTV:

I also shoot with the Sony FS700 and Speedbooster. The FS700 is sharper and has greater dynamic range (at least 2 stops) along with smaller H.264 files. When white balance is set properly, color processing is decent but still can't match Canon, especially for skintones.

The Odyssey 7Q (haven't used one yet) takes the FS700 to another level, though from footage posted so far the color processing is still not as good as 5D3 14-bit raw.

The GH4 has resolution to spare but falls short on color processing and DR and has a tiny sensor (only S35 with a Speedbooster- an issue if needing full frame FOV). The A7S looks to have excellent color processing and DR though has a fair amount of rolling shutter.

For run and gun, the 5D3 is better than the FS700 as it's lighter and easier to focus when using a quality viewfinder loupe. The FS700 can use autofocus lenses but they are slow and don't always focus on the desired object.

5D3 14-bit raw is spectacular, especially when processed with ACR. The tradeoff is card and disk space and processing time. For the price, this is the closest one can get to an ARRI Alexa/Amira- the best cameras in most people's eyes.

(GH4 can't compete with this color; processed with Resolve- ACR wasn't used)
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?322289-Wedding-(RAW)&s=6bee780c6bd52fdfdd928bcee7cec245 (Low light raw, processed with ACR).

[FilmBrute]

Shooting weddings on a BMPCC? I'd easily take a 5D for that... Better battery life, low light, easier workflow for quick turnaround, easier media storage, onboard mics that are functional (in case of emergency), more lens options w/ IS. 

[Mark Holmes]

Canon (and the 5D3) has the nicest color processing in the price range, especially for skintones. In good/bright light, the 5D3 H.264 sharpens nicely and looks really good on a large HDTV at a normal viewing distance. It's very important to use sharp lenses and to nail focus. The 24-105 F4L is ok for closeups, but not so good for anything else (sharpness). The 16-35 F2.8L II, 24-70 F2.8L II, and 70-200 F2.8L II are very sharp and really help the 5D3 H.264 look its best. Nikon and Zeiss primes are also very sharp; the new Sigma 50mm should be spectacular.

Canon L lenses with H.264 (IPB): looks good on HDTV:

I also shoot with the Sony FS700 and Speedbooster. The FS700 is sharper and has greater dynamic range (at least 2 stops) along with smaller H.264 files. When white balance is set properly, color processing is decent but still can't match Canon, especially for skintones.

The Odyssey 7Q (haven't used one yet) takes the FS700 to another level, though from footage posted so far the color processing is still not as good as 5D3 14-bit raw.

The GH4 has resolution to spare but falls short on color processing and DR and has a tiny sensor (only S35 with a Speedbooster- an issue if needing full frame FOV). The A7S looks to have excellent color processing and DR though has a fair amount of rolling shutter.

For run and gun, the 5D3 is better than the FS700 as it's lighter and easier to focus when using a quality viewfinder loupe. The FS700 can use autofocus lenses but they are slow and don't always focus on the desired object.

5D3 14-bit raw is spectacular, especially when processed with ACR. The tradeoff is card and disk space and processing time. For the price, this is the closest one can get to an ARRI Alexa/Amira- the best cameras in most people's eyes.

(GH4 can't compete with this color; processed with Resolve- ACR wasn't used)
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?322289-Wedding-(RAW)&s=6bee780c6bd52fdfdd928bcee7cec245 (Low light raw, processed with ACR).

I would agree that current GH4 clips can't compare with this or much of the 5D MK3 Raw stuff. 

But I'm very curious to see professionally shot GH4 4K 10 bit ProRes, graded in Resolve. I don't believe this will be possible without the new 4K recorders, but it might be some stunning footage that will compare well with 5D stuff. Time will tell.

[Christina Ava]

That's important for me, is a big factor, with the 5d I would have worst image quality in more space!

I'd rather use tons of gigabytes only for high quality material like raw or prores, not muddy h264!

 

im not sure this is applicable in weddings, i shoot non stop for 10 hours+ and with 2 or 3 diff cameras, the post prosessing would be a nightmare i already deal with 100s of gigs. Have you ever tried the 4k workflow? its very time consuming, i can only see raw being used for a small clip, and not in a live event situation..

 

about the muddy h264, i think the canon color tones and inherent softness is an advantage in my line of work.

i tried some sharp sensors in a wedding, with this setup

 Panasonic Lumix:
Voigtlander 25mm f/.95 Nokton Micro Four Thirds 
Canon 50mm f/1.4 FD S.S.C. II (via MFT adapter)

 

when i put them side by side the lumix produced a more clinical look, clean and clear and sharp yes! But lets say your bride had acne when she was 15teen, the mudinnes was a saviour because it does make the skin look better, and saves you the post processing

 

concerning the black magic, as being more cost effective, i want to ask how much money you need to throw at it to make it actually work for a run & gun situation? record video, have space for 10hours worth of footage, and be able to operate in a handheld position..also say you need a same day edit, the bmcc needs hours of post to make the footage actually look ok. 

i have shot weddings with the mark 3 that i didnt even touched the colors, just cut the footage and uploaded.

by using the correct white balance, iso, kelvins you can create the video in a WYSIWYG way, 

this saves you time.

 

of course if you are going for a perfect image, and cash! i would suggest the canon 1DC.

 

:)