Отзывы о Цифровой Фотоаппарат Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Ни нашел отличий от 5D2. Та же проблема с красным каналом: у 5D1 - красный...

Мне его подарили! Так как у него пантон ФЕРАРРИ-алый! Типа сначала калькулятор ФЕРАРРИ-потом и машину...... а я на него в первый день кофе пролил- думал все....плакал мой ФЕРАРРИ. Так у него клавиши снимаются, чтобы их помыть можно было. Снял-помыл....-как новый- ВЕЩЧ! Шикарный подарок!

Мне его подарили! Так как у него пантон ФЕРАРРИ-алый! Типа сначала калькулятор ФЕРАРРИ-потом и машину...... а я на него в первый день кофе пролил- думал все....плакал мой ФЕРАРРИ. Так у него клавиши снимаются, чтобы их помыть можно было. Снял-помыл....-как новый- ВЕЩЧ! Шикарный подарок!

Bought this model to take over where the Canon 1Ds worked perfectly using the EF 28-300 3.5-5.6 L IS USM lens mostly. It departs in may ways with great improvements in the higher megapixel, quieter shutter noise and video/audio recording. I needed the camera to be quiet and could not believe the 1Ds was SO noisy. Could not use in recitals or shooting creatures. The EOS 5D Mark III has so much desirable and few things a bit awkward starting with the mode dial locking button. Didn't need to have 2 functions to rotate the dial that previous models for the most part omitted. The set button changes not only the touch pad changes but also the multi-controller toggle button that you need to drop down and hit the set button to confirm an action. The CF card positions in the camera does not allow your finger/thumb nail to snag the CF edge lip since it faces the card slot cover. I have to noodle around rather than use a thumb nail and pull out easily. Could be my "basket ball palming"size hands.FYI: If you need Canon service out of warranty. This new 5Dm3 gave contact errors with the 28-300 L lens the 1Ds didn't and noticed the lens mount was damaged but still would fire taking perfect shots. I sent to Canon authorized facility in CA last week for the mount to be replaced and dust removed out of the front elements. They quoted $435 and later changed it to $998(discounted to $804 after complaining) citing a stabilizer major repair plus what I wanted originally. Canon cites a tier structure not visible to the public of billing with no way to order what you want but what they deem needing repair. Your choice is to pay what they want or they will not repair it and send it back. This is America isn't it? (Wish I could do that in my service business, dictate what and how much you will pay or else!). It was not clear what was included with various tiers and not at their service website for disclosure. Canon has great products but their authorized service is appalling to not do what consumers want but what they want to do. I have zero confidence in their repair skills/service if this is how they charge consumers with out disclosure prior to sending gear to them. I found out to late that the Canon original parts cost of a flange and rubber seal, over-nighted would have been under $65. Of course the cleaning of the front elements would have been excluded but the lens would have never left my house. The lens had no other evidence of failure other than contacts not meeting and the damaged flange. Now I will never be sure if the repair was actually needed, damaged in shipment to them or how long the lens will function since it was opened up and "repaired". I lost major ground in Canon authorized services. Be advised, don't freak out when "what ever" fails and start figuring out what you need. Study ALL your options before the "bait and switch" or mystery billing events tags your wallet! There are websites that offer everything you need for your out of warranty gear repair if you or someone is up to it. Some of us have no problems with repairs and given the risk potential of strangers work, shipping and can do just as good. Not everyone has endless funds and this lens was not cheap.Update Feb 26, 2014: After back and forth with Canon in Irvin, CA and customer relations more "damages" were disclosed that seem to be their justification for the major service criteria. The small surface scratch on the lens barrel from a 1943 bomber ride with my then 85 year old mother at 5000 feet with wind turbulence was the reason for the need to replace the lens barrel. Did not effect functionality and I earned and loved that scratch. It was a paint scratch, not a dent, the camera and lens was never dropped and the zoom action was perfect, just fine. That along with the stabilizer replacement and what I wanted, front elements cleaned and base mount replacement justified the second estimation of the $998. Talking with customer relations dropped the labor cost to parts only charges. The point is I needed the front elements cleaned and the base mount replaced and Canon in Irvin, CA found everything else and refused to do what I wanted/needed due to their high standards of not letting anything out the facility that did not meet their "high" standards of service. All or none! The owner of the property DID NOT have any say in what was going to be performed, zero. With Canon services warranty or out of warranty gear the owner of the property has zero input to what is performed. The web site does not give you a clue to anything you can expect and you will not learn anything until the item is shipped and gone through who knows how many Canon service hands, departments. The risk potential grows exponentially once it leaves your hands no matter what anyone says. Again, before sending to any repair facility, Canon or not, in or out of warranty, be advised that what ever you thought you needed may be of no consequence to the p

The switch from Nikon:After being with nikon for 16+ years, I recently threw in the towel. As a wedding shooter, I count on my equipment and need things to work correctly.I had purchased two nikon d600's 1 year apart and both had the horrible dust/debris issue. After repeat cleanings and 20,000+ shots, both cameras still had the issue. I got tired of wet cleaning the sensors and got tired of nikons poor customer service. Nikon decided that the D600 owners just had to either deal with repeat sensor cleanings or send in the camera to "possibly" have the issue resolved. Nikon had no proven fix besides switching out the shutter and praying that the issue went away. Nikon released the d610 and left the rest of the people hanging.Leaving nikon was extremely difficult for me because I had a big investment in the bodies, accessories and glass. I made the move at a huge loss but am extremely happy that I did.The differences:I purchased both a 6D and the 5D mark III from amazon. The immediate thing that I have noticed is that all my canon glass has been good with focus right out of the box. With almost every nikon lens/camera combo, I had to pull out a focus chart and focus tune software and apply fine tuning. I also noticed that the focus system on my canons do not have the tendency to act up under tungsten lighting like my nikons did. My d600's and d7000 had a tendency to back-focus under heavy tungsten lighting.The canon DPP software is a pleasure to use. I hated Nikon capture NX2. It was slow and the user interface was horrible. Canon DPP loads quickly and applying batch changes is amazing. I do miss the Nik software selection point feature of CNX2.The one thing I don't like is the fact that canon makes you purchase your lens hoods separately and at a premium.I do like the fact that the canon equipment is made in japan and has a quality feel to it compared to cameras like the d600 that are made in Thailand.The 5D mark iii vs D800:Prior to leaving nikon, I also spent a week with the nikon D800. I found that the d800 produced a lot of noise in the raw files when pushed to higher iso's. This alone was enough to turn me off. I did test my sample of the d800 for left focus issues. I did not have the left AF issue of older d800's but the camera I got had some focus issues that required fine tuning all my glass to the body. In some cases the fine tune was at +20.The D800 files did have a lot of detail and dynamic range but the file size was huge. If you shoot a lot of landscape and want lots of dynamic range, the d800 is a good option. But the dynamic range comes at the cost of nikons lack of quality control.If dynamic range is not your main goal but want a great reliable camera with a killer AF system (better in my testing) and smaller files, the canon 5D mark III is amazing. I suggest not to get caught up in the megapixel game unless you do some very heavy cropping like birds in flight for which the d800 may be a better choice. The 5D mark III files are great and have plenty of latitude for most users.5D mark III:Focus:Focus Focus Focus. The 5D mark III has a killer focus system. The best that I have used. The focus system is lighting fast, accurate and very very customizable. It is a pleasure to be able to customize my focus system like this. I recently shot an event and out of 700+ images, I scrapped maybe 10 shots because of focus. The ones I did delete because of focus was do to me not placing the focus point on the right area of the image. No back/front focus like my nikons had. No focus shift under tungsten lighting like some nikons.The hit rate on focus is amazing. You want to know why canon can charge a premium for this camera? Because of its pure amazing focus system! If you absolutely need the best focus system on any camera, this is it.Customization:You can assign buttons to do certain functions and to your own shooting style. This is a god send compared to nikons lack of customization.Body:The camera is solid with a good feel in the hand. The buttons are easy to operate and cleverly located. Coming from nikon is an adjustment because the camera buttons are in a different layout. It will become easy to use after some time and practice.I did not like the fact that canon has no built in removable screen protector like the nikon. This is a minor gripe but one that I resolved by buying the vello stick on glass protectors. I know the nikon plastic screen protectors are not fancy but they did a good job of protecting the screen from bumps.Images:The 5D makr III images are fantastic. The auto white balance works much better compared to my nikons I had owned. The 5D mark III is not able to pull details from the shadows like the D800 or D600 so it is a sacrifice in dynamic range if that is the most important thing to you. Nikon still has canon beat in dynamic range.I will personally will take a in focus, sharp, good out of camera white balance and dust free image out of a canon any day vs a hit and miss focus and du

UPDATED REVIEW OUT BELOW. AFTER 3 TRIPS TO THE REPAIR CENTER, CANON FINALLY REPAIRED MY CAMERA.I got this camera as a birthday gift this year. It worked great for the first 2 month and I noticed a lot of dust just started sticking to the sensor and isn't falling off. I never had this issue with my Canon EOS 7D which I had for 2 years now. On my Canon EOS 7D, I rarely get dust, and when I do, it usually gets shaken off by the self cleaning unit on the next power cycle. On my Canon EOS 5D Mark III, this never happened. The dust just kept collecting and collecting (the sensor was a dust magnet), so I sensed something was wrong with the self cleaning unit. Not to mention the camera was underexposing 80% of the time. I sent it into the Canon Irvine, CA service center for them to repair it. They adjusted the camera meter. They also adjusted the self cleaning sensor unit (so it was malfunctioning) and did a sensor clean. When I got it back, I noticed they left a bunch of residue and dust on my sensor (more than what I had before). The self sensor cleaning unit did nothing to it. Canon support gave me a shipping label back to get it fixed. So I sent it back in. A week later I got it back, not only was my sensor dirtier (I have test shots), they also left several scratches across the back of my camera and on the side! I contacted Canon support again. They gave me a label to ship it back in to get all the problems fixed. Now they want me to pay almost $280 for replacement parts even though all these issues happened because of the camera malfunction and due to the repair center worker's carelessness! To add insult to injury, I shared this repair story on their Facebook page. Instead of replying me to make things right, they just deleted my post all together. Very scammy company, do not recommend buying their products. I will attempt to work things out with their customer support. Will keep you guys posted. Also Canon, if you are reading this, having to send in my camera in for repair for the same issues (and issues introduced during the repairs) 3 times is very unacceptable.To people who says the reviews are about the products and not the repair centers. It is about the product. Not only is my camera screwed up on the basic functions of a digital camera, don't count on Canon to honor their in-warranty repairs (which is part of the product you buy). If you get a defective Canon EOS 5D Mark III, guess what? You are out $3500+tax!Update 7-11-2013:After 3 trips to Canon's repair center (still pretty ridiculous how they didn't get it right the first time), they have adequately fixed my camera. While there are still a few dust spots on the sensor, they are barely noticeable, so they did clean my camera to an acceptable level. It seems CPS handled my repair this time as my camera came back in a CPS bag. Also they have decided to replace the scratched up parts (caused by the repair center) for free after I complained to their Facebook page. Since my camera is usable now, I will need to take this camera and shoot before I can give a full review on the product. Right now I have upped my review to 3 stars and I doubt I will ever give it a 5 star rating due to the fact that the I had to send the camera in 3 times to get an in-warranty repair correct. If the warranty is part of the product you buy, Canon needs to be able to honor that warranty before the customer needs to make complaints online.MAIN REVIEW HERE (10-15-2013):I will not raise my star rating from 3/5 on this camera due to the problems I am about to describe in this review and the horrible warranty service I received. This is an okay camera, and can work very fast in continuous shutter mode. The focus tracking is very fast and I have used it on quick moving subjects and it hits the mark 95% of the time. Also, I can use this camera up to ISO 6400 with no issue in low light. While a bit grainy, there is barely any image noise even at ISO 6400. There is also no noise even during long exposures. I only spotted around 5 tiny "hot pixels" after a 4 minute long exposure. The camera has a built in "quiet mode" which kind of works. It suppresses the mirror slap noise, and I have used a few times outside around wildlife. While it does make a sound, ambient noise is enough to cover over it! Sometimes, I accidentally fire off 2 shots in this mode because I didn't hear the mirror. Also, this camera is incredibly rugged, and I have shot with it in rain and under waterfalls. No water got in and it performs very well (just make sure you have a weatherproofed lens too!). The only few issues that still persists in this camera is underexposure and white balance. My camera still constantly underexposes 2/3 to 1 stop around 75% of the time even though the light meter has already been checked and adjusted several times at the repair center during that self sensor cleaning problem. Also, I have noticed that the auto white balance is always off especially in day light. All my photos always h

I am an amateur photographer with no aims or designs to ever become a professional. My start into digital photography was a fluke, and in the intervening years I have become increasingly passionate about this hobby but know I never will seek to do this professionally. I chose Canon simply because I was first exposed to it, and not because I have deep-seated convictions it is "superior" to Nikon. I have used some Nikon equipment and find it to be very high performing and exceptionally suited to photography. I am more familiar with the Canon menu system, and having used it for a number of years, I feel I have come to understand the layout and functionality of the menu system, which is important for on-the-fly changes to settings.I own a Canon camera with an APS-C, two film slr cameras (Pentax), and now the 5d Mark III.I love this camera. I admit to having a bit of techno-lust, but this camera has was worth every single penny to me, because I love the images I've been able to produce with it.The larger sensor size on the Mark III makes it roughly equivalent to 35mm film. The ISO range is large (50 to 102,800), and low-light performance is solid. Images still have very high detail at 1600, and the camera produces very acceptable images at 6400 ISO. Images produces at 12,800 are still solid, as there is still a lot of detail though noise does enter the picture.The auto-focus system is tremendous. Having gone from 7 auto focus points on my previous model to a fast and response 61 point system has helped nail focus in dark environments. It is fast and very responsive, and the ability to switch to a precise auto-focus point with one touch is a real boon. Customizable menus and the ability to change functions from factory default to specialized functions has really made this camera a joy to use. With my old camera, I sometimes felt limited or frustrated in what could be accomplished; with the Mark III I often find myself saying, "it can do that, too? Oh man... how cool is that?"I travel frequently (and often in harsh environments), so the weather sealing and rugged body is a real plus for me. My old camera looks like it's been fed to the dogs but it still keeps going, the Mark III feels like it is built like a tank in comparison, so I have fewer qualms about taking it out into rougher weather or dirty environments. I prefer landscapes and street photography, so the wider sensor suits my style. The ergonomics are preferable (for me, at least) to the smaller APS-C styled bodies, but the rugged build does come at a significant weight disadvantage, as this weighs roughly 50% more than my other body. When coupled with a heavy lens, it can be a burden to drag around on a long day.Even still, it is a joy. The silent shutter mode is a HUGE advance, as it makes street photography much more practical. You can snap a pic and be on your way before your subject even registers the camera.EDIT:I've had this now for over a year, and I've just fallen completely in love with its capabilities. It's making me a more adventurous photographer as it is making me push the boundries of my photography as it presents options that I didn't even know where there. In camera HDR is a gimmick but produces useful images. Multiple exposures are fun, and a nice feature. But what really has blown me away with this is the level of control I have over my images. I find more and more that I am able to dial in settings on the fly to get the image "right" in the camera, reducing post processing time.Since you can write RAW and JPEG, you've got files ready for transfer and the originals for playing with.This camera will age gracefully. It has withstood lots of abuse already and still looks great. The weather sealing has been a boon. Even though I am careful with my gear, there's a certain amount of damage that will happen if you're in tough environments.A tremendous effort by Canon.

Exceptional low light DSLR. Shows very little noise, even at high ISO. Focus is spot on, though a little complex at first. Paired with L lenses, this has tremendous capability to focus in very dim lighting conditions and deliver some great results.For the last three years I have shot with either a Rebel or the 7D, and my biggest complaint has been the noise that is present in low light photos. With the 5D Mark III, this is no longer an issue. The best part of the camera is that it can adapt to most lighting conditions, with the right user input and management of camera settings. I prefer the natural look of photos without a flash, and it seems that in most cases the lighting conditions you shoot in are sub optimal.Color of photos it produces looks very pleasing and natural. Though there may be some advantages to shooting RAW, my preference is JPEG for simple photo sharing and editing, and JPEG photos work great.Love the sound of the shutter, and love the fact that you can easily switch it to silent mode shooting. It's impressively quiet.The two compromises I felt I had to make when getting this camera were (1) lack of a flip out screen and (2) lack of autofocus video. Perhaps in future versions Canon will consider a pull out screen, and hopefully improve the focus accuracy and speed when shooting in Live View mode. Still a big sluggish on this model. As far as the video autofocus capability goes, it seems like it needs refining and fine tuning. I believe some Nikon DSLR cameras have this, but I'm not sure how well it really works. Overall I've been quite satisfied with the 5D Mark III and have not dwelled much on what I considered to be "compromises" (or missing features), but rather have enjoyed shooting.Most of my photography is for my children, and this is where the autofocus and low light capabilities really shine. Other things I shoot include flowers and landscapes.The 6D may be a good alternative for some who are looking for the best budget full frame option. Though I considered it, my concern was that the autofocus capability and limited view finder coverage of the 6D would be limiting. It would be nice to have the 5D Mark III be a little bit smaller, though.The build is excellent. Feels much like the 7D, but more refined. My hands are big, so it fits me well.Lenses I use in with the camera includeCanon 24-70 L - extremely useful. I find the wide angle quite nice. The 24-70 on the 7D (cropped sensor) just didn't go wide enough.Canon 50 1.4 - nice and lightweight, and great when stopped down to F2 or beyond. Has great background blur. I also have the 40mm lens but find the 50mm more useful viewing angle. Quite tricky to shoot at F1.4 or F1.8 - most everything is out of focus. But a fun lens. Wish it focused better in dim lighting - seems to struggle.Canon 28-135 IS - handy walk around lens. Use it for vacations mostly. F5.6 on the telephoto side is a bit slow for me. Quality of photos is good, but not really comparable to the L lenses. Don't use this lens that much.Canon 100 IS L Macro - the viewing angle seems just right for portraiture. Also use it for macro, of course. Exceptional bokeh and photo quality. Fairly lightweight.Canon 70-200 IS L II - my favorite lens by far. Most pleasing results, and fast on focus and on performance. Most often shoot at F 2.8 or F 3.5. Would probably use this lens much more if it were smaller / more lightweight. But then it probably wouldn't be F 2.8. My wife and I call this the "King Lens," and it's well deserving of that title. Phenomenal build quality and very fast lens.I like Ken Rockwell's review of the 5D Mark III. Read it several times before getting the camera, and I think it's a great source of information to consider if you're looking at the camera.Costs a lot. Ouch! I've actually been somewhat careful about where I take it, which wasn't even a thought with the 7D or the Rebel T1i. Sometimes I wish I had a little Rebel for smaller size and portability and less liability (i.e. concern it will get lost or be stolen), but then I remind myself that I wouldn't be satisfied with the performance and photos, particularly the low light capabilities.I hope to get many years of functional and successful use with the 5D. I considered the Mark II version, but wanted easier video controls and updated auto focus. Glad I went with the Mark III. I'm using the video more often than I thought, though the manual focus does take some getting used to. And lots of practice and patience. But when done right, it's very rewarding.By the count and quality of lenses I have, and given the 5D Mark III is pretty much a professional camera, I probably ought to be making some kind of business or money on it. But I just use it for family photography and enjoyment. Worth the price for something like this? It took me about three years thinking about a full frame wondering that question. Glad I did, if for nothing else, then for the reason that

I'll keep this brief since there are so many thorough reviews. Everybody talks about the big things, so I thought I would try to focus more on the little things you don't read about as much. I'll hit on the big things first and get into the little things after. The recommendation is simple and short: is this body worth it as an upgrade from a 7D or a 5D II.This camera is substantially improved in the autofocus system of the 5D II! But lesser so relative to the 7D. The 7D is likely good enough to not require an upgrade to this camera for this feature, but this is a revolutionary upgrade over the 5D II. Having all the points is so convenient, and almost all of them are as accurate as the center point of the 5D II. One advantage over the 7D autofocus system is the level of customization possible with shutter priority and servo methods.The ISO range and noise performance at high ISO is much better than both the 7D and 5D II. This is a feature that I would recommend upgrading for. Images are usable for publication at 12800 after noise reduction and sharpening for small enlargements. 25600 ISO on the 5D III is pushing it, but for 8 X 10 prints, the quality is good enough to make sellable prints.Weather sealing is better than both the 7D and the 5D II. The battery grip is more stable and integrated with the 5D III than either of the other camera bodies I have used. Canon did a great job with making the battery grip feel VERY solid on the 5D III. This was actually one point that not many people comment on but I really appreciated. It almost feels as uniform as the vertical grip on the 1D X - yes, it's that firm with the body. I really liked that.The shutter speed is 2 frames faster than the 5D II and 2 frames slower than the 7D. It's right in the middle between the two.A smaller difference that isn't usually mentioned is how much better the depth of the hand grip is. The camera handle actually comes out a little further, which means my fingers wrap around the handle much better. I really like that because I feel like I have a more solid hold on the body with heavy lenses than I did with either the 7D or the 5D II.There is the addition of a multi-function button next to the shutter, and the 5D III is more customizable in general than either the 7D or the 5D III. The customization ability is probably the least spoken about benefit of upgrading to the 5D III from the 7D and 5D II.Is the 5D III worth the upgrade for the price? I think it depends on what you are going to use it for. The 7D was always best considered the enthusiast action camera and the 5D II was always considered the enthusiast studio camera. I think the 5D III could replace both of these as a combined enthusiast action and studio camera. I have to be careful about saying that however - the 5D III is really a professional tool, not an enthusiast camera. I think the 5D III performs best as a studio camera, but it can do well as an action camera. The level of performance is in some ways on par with the 1D series, but missing some of the advanced technology in the 1D X like the improved metering system and the metering-autofocus integration. Upgrading from a 7D for action photography? I would upgrade to the 1D X instead of the 5D III, unless you want to do more studio work than action photography. Upgrading from the 5D II is an easy recommendation to spend the money and upgrade. The low noise performance, improved dynamic range, added versatility, and customizable options make the 5D III an easy upgrade from the 5D II and worth the price.

This is my review as a landscape photographer. Upfront you should know that I don't shoot video. I realize there are many video upgrades but I wouldn't have a use for them in my current work. That's not covered in this review.When the MkIII first was announced, it was about $500 more than it is now. And on paper, I decided that for the quality differences in my actual images, it would not be worth the upgrade. I felt content in my analysis and went on happily using my MkII for several more months in which I logged thousands of frames and make several new additions to my portfolio, which you can see at LensTraveler18 and at this moment all images in the last 3 years are from the MkII. This winter, I traveled to Jordan with a group of photographers and met a guy who went through the same thought process I did. He gave me a complete tour of the new features and I was blown away with the improvements made by Canon.After the recent price drop, which brought the MkIII within about $500 more than what I paid for the MkII, I decided to make the purchase. I am thrilled that I did.I just returned from Iceland and used both cameras and started to notice differences that make my experience more enjoyable and my images "better" from my perspective. I will try and explain what I found and why those changes were important to me.This is a complete overhaul, upgrade and enhancement of the MkII.There are no similarities except the size of the sensor physically and the number of megapixels which is roughly the same as the MkII. So to consider this an upgrade is misleading.The body is shaped differently yet almost completely familiar to the MkII user, and the menu structure is an enhanced version of the MkII. It's VERY enhanced.The Canon "Experience:"If I were to summarize what I realized and what's been said over and over here in the forums is that Canon actually listened to users carefully and implemented nearly every suggestion for improvement, and there are many. I cannot say enough about Canon and Canon Professional Services (CPS,) who are the repair and service arm of Canon. Nikon readers should tune out here, I suspect you will be disappointed. Before I left for Iceland, I had my 5dMkII cleaned and adjusted by CPS, it took 3 days, the camera came back better than it was before and I had a long conversation with the service rep who explained what was found and what was done to my camera. Side note: I slipped and smashed a 17-40L zoom to smithereens. I spent 5 minutes picking up the pieces so I wouldn't litter. I put all the pieces into a box and shipped it to Canon. They charged me under two hundred and returned a perfect, tested lens. That's what you get with Canon.Features:With the MkIII, autofocus has been enhanced so much that it's practically telepathic. The problem is that so much new functionality is built in, the learning curve on the autofocus system itself is substantial. You can just use it like you did on the MkII and it's 1000% better but there's so much it can do. I cared about that, I was thrilled to see how heavily it was enhanced.The AEB (autoexposure bracketing) system now matches Nikon in allowing for 3, 5 and 7 frames, with 1/3 to 2 stops between each frame and with full offset. For HDR types, this is a huge improvement and very welcome. The memory card management system now accepts two cards, one SD and on CF, and you can separate which image types goes to which card or use them as backup. I realize Nikon's high end cameras had this before so it's catchup here too. But very welcome.There are two new "functions" which are useful and one of them is AWESOME. The camera can now shoot HDR and process 3 frames into a single Jpg image. I have no use for this since I do everything in software but many people will really enhance their results with this new feature. The other new function is "multiple exposure" shooting which I haven't had since my film days. Yes, I am that old. I had some fun with it this past weekend and I am thrilled it's there.Virtually ALL buttons are definable and a new "Q" button has been added. I think it was on other Canon models but not on the MkII. I have already become so used to it, I almost can't imagine working without it.The processor upgrade shows up as faster processing time for noise reduction, higher frame rates and generally snappier performance. Since I spend time out in the dark, I was concerned with low light performance. This gets into a discussion of how the new sensor performs. The new sensor has about double the dynamic range as the MkII. At night, I expose at ISO100 for 10 minutes typically and sharpness was always excellent on the MkII, I never complained. Yet the MkIII is better in several ways; the pixels are "sharper" the fringing/noise is far lower and the color appears more accurate. There are also non-specific differences in that images seem to "look better" which is totally subjective, when shot with the MkIII.I know the new 6D will be readily available s

I have owned this camera for about a year now and just now getting around to writing my review, so I can say with 100% certainty how I feel.I have been a Canon shooter for a while and I am stepping up from a Canon 7D. The 5D is a little bit bigger than the 7D but both have similar build qualities. Some of the things that have changed from the 7D to the 5Dmkiii is the shooting function button, to change from Manual to Shutter Priority there is now a button on top that stops you from accidentally changing modes. Other than that, the ergonomics are pretty much the same (outside of the AF System).I had been shooting with the 7D for some time and I was really on the fence about making the move because I swear (and still do given I own both cameras) that there is not a significant difference between the images of the cameras when shooting at lower ISO's. When looking at both images side by side colors are slightly better, it seems like tonal gradients looked a little better but it was not huge. The problem I had with the 7D is that at ISO 3200 the images were so noisy they were about unusable, even with some cleanup things were pretty rough. I have shot many images with the 5D3 and I get great looking shots at ISO3200.The other huge difference is the AF System on the 5D3, head and shoulders better than anything I had ever used. The 7D was good and worked well and I had an old 1DMkii that had 45AF Points and was blazing fast but the new 5D was amazing and how many different configurations of the AF system you could set took me months to get used to but I love it. Sure the Nikon D800 has 36megapixels but I have always said, I will take a lower resolution shot that is spot on and crisp over a high resolution image that is blurry.Both in studio and out in nature this camera performs well and is very refined. I have shot with the Canon 7D, Sony NEX 5, NEX 3 and the new Fuji X-E2 and will take this camera every time. It has an AF System I can count on to be spot on every time, the ergonomics of it allow me to pull the camera out of my bag and change shutter, aperture and ISO without ever moving my eye out of the viewfinder and the LCD screen looks great in back.If I were going to knock anything it might be the slower burst mode but that would be about it. I don't shoot enough video with it to really talk about it's performance but I know a lot of people love it for that.************UPDATE****************** 04-09-2014After my last studio shoot I decided to send my camera into canon for cleaning (I normally have my camera sent out in January when I am shooting less to make sure everything is working right) and I get the estimate back that the there is dust between the low pass filter and the sensor and because of that the sensor needs to be replaced. Keep in mind at this point the camera had been used mainly in studio and never seen a drop of rain and is never kept without a lens or body cap on the camera AND the camera is only 15 months old. Given the light use and delicate care I take with my equipment and that I had a 7D for over two years working in the exact same environments with no problems, I feel this is 100% a manufacturers defect. After writing Canon several times they refused to address the problem and I was stuck with a 940 dollar bill.After the new sensor had been placed in the camera everything works good.To me it is crazy to think that needing to replace the sensor every year is a normal thing and considering Canon refuses to answer my questions regarding this repair I am to assume this is somewhat common.At this point I am never buying another Canon product ever again. There are too many great camera manufacturers out there to hold allegiance to a company that does not value me as a customer. I have owned the 20D, 7D and 5Dmkii. I own the 16-35 L, 24-70L, 35mm L, 50mm macro, 85 1.8, 100mm Macro L, 135 L and 70-200 L. Goodbye Canon.

As a background, I've been shooting SLRs for nearly 35 years. I've owned and loved my Nikon D300, battery grip, and Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 and 14-24mm f/2.8 lenses for 5 years. I was ready to upgrade to a "hybrid" stills and video camera, but my primary passion is stills photography.Like most Nikon photographers, I was extremely excited about the Nikon D800 when it was announced, but paused as it became clear that there were some manufacturing problems that were being sorted out. I waited a year and recently purchased a D800 body with serial 305xxx from Amazon, thinking that surely the left-focus issue was behind us. I was incorrect. After two bodies exhibiting the same unacceptable left-sensor-focus problem, and despite witnessing the most amazing dynamic range I've ever seen from a DSLR sensor, I decided to take a deep breath and switch to Canon.However, my switch from Nikon was not without its challenges--mostly due to apparent manufacturing tolerance issues between the 5D Mark III body and several L lenses that I ordered. The first 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 50mm f/1.2L did not focus properly. For all three of these lenses, micro-adjustments were not adequate to fix the problems. However, the second copies of two out of three of these lenses were fantastic (I gave up finding a 50mm f/1.2 that could focus). The 24-70mm f/2.8L II in particular is the sharpest lens I've ever used on any camera at f/2.8.Now that the lens problem is sorted out, I offer the following review:Image quality: Subject detail for a 22MP sensor is astounding (especially with the 24-70mm f/2.8 II) and the color rendition is wonderful--much better auto white balance than the D800. Dynamic range is only acceptable; I occasionally see shadow noise and banding with dark, colorful subjects at ISO 100 when I push the images slightly in post (but oddly, not at higher ISOs). Likewise, highlights can't be recovered as reliably as I would expect. Canon has some room for improvement here (this is a real Nikon strength), and for this alone I deduct 1 star. The high ISO noise performance is about as good as the D800--really excellent! If you are careful with exposure (which oddly I have to bias +2/3 or the images are too dark), you can achieve extraordinary results.Autofocus: Quite good overall--fast and accurate. It is similar to the D800 but without face detection through the viewfinder. It is unfortunate that face detection through the viewfinder is missing; the feature appears in the Canon 1D X, actually works and seems to aid not only candid photography, but also sports/action where faces can be detected. The detail focus on the 5D Mark III is really great, but the subject tracking is remarkably poor, bordering on unusable in my opinion. My Nikon D300 from 5 years ago can track subjects much more reliably.Ergonomics: The camera is big, but the ergonomics are fantastic--far superior to the Nikon D300 and the D800. Unlike the D800 that feels a bit like holding a 2x4, the 5D Mark III has a wonderful grip and thumb groove that inspires confidence. The control layout is different than Nikon but not terribly so, and after a brief period every bit as easy to use. The C1, C2, C3 custom modes are wonderful. I purchased the battery grip extender and love the improved ergonomics. I don't quite understand why the grip extender control positions don't better match the positions on the camera body, although this doesn't seem to matter much in practice.Video quality: I was prepared for good-but-mushy, alias-and-moire-free video. What I am seeing is wonderful, bokeh-filled, full-frame goodness. The resolution looks great to me, and while there are 3rd party firmware upgrades available (from Magic Lantern) that bring high-dynamic-range RAW video with remarkable quality, I don't think I need this; I love the look of the stock 5D Mark III video. As a point of reference, the Nikon D800 exhibited some moire the first time I tested the video feature.Overall: Except for the rough landing with Canon lenses (all sorted thanks to Amazon), I haven't had this much fun with photography in a very long time.

I've had this camera for a while and bought it because I was in need of it for a video shoot during the summer. I primarily shoot video and not so much with photos. I just want to highlight some key rounds on why I chose this camera over Nikon, which a lot of people who come here are probably debating.I had high hopes for this camera. The II which came out in '08 was already an exceptional camera and people were comparing it to RED, so naturally I thought the III would be all that better. Canon did fix what the II had deficiencies on, but it didn't really take any great leaps to continue with furthering its strong suites, which I think holds it back in some categories that Nikon now surpasses in.Here are a few things that Nikon D800 does well better than 5dIIIBetter latitude/dynamic range (especially in photos) You can actually pull out detail, color information and gamma in shadows taken in RAW that you can't do with the 5dIII. In fact, if you try to do so with the 5dIII, you get heavy noise and artifacts.It is sharper in terms of video (out of camera). The out of camera video remains much sharper and has greater detail than the 5dIII. When I shot with the 5dIII it looks very fuzzy and very soft. But I do think this is in direct correlation to why the 5d has better moire and anti-aliasing than the d800. This becomes apparent when I sharpened the image in post and the detail and sharpness came back but I got more aliasing and moire . So I think Canon did this in mind that this was the trade off for the low moire and aliasing.I think the D800 just takes better overall photos in general.Here is a few things that the 5d III does better than Nikon D800First off, I explained that there was an issue with the softness of the video. Well all this can be corrected if you just run it through some software and sharpen the video. It looks more comparable to the D800.The 5d is faster than the D800 in terms of FPS and how fast and accurately it focuses in on the subject.It is all around better in low light, better ISO performance and doesn't go to the extremes that D800 goes through by making the ISO steps less dramatic.Better ergonomics. Feels like you're gripping a military weapon that was designed in mind that someone would need to express a comfortable feel when shooting.Allows for editing and post work in Video shot. The d800 doesn't fair well when you try to sharpen it and the 5d performs better in post for video. The opposite is true for photo though.And here are a few of the intangible observations that I came up with. The 5d III has excellent battery life and far surpasses the D800 in battery longevity. The battery lasted for maybe 3-4 hours of shooting video and idling when I did my shoot. When I used an older Canon 60d, the battery life was about just an 1 hour of the same activity I was putting it through. The D800 is about just an hour of battery time for the same out of work. The second one that nobody mentions is the codec. The 5d III uses a very advanced codec that compresses the files so they take up almost nearly no space on your flash drives. I shot with the 60d last year and it was gobbling up maybe 32 gigs per 45-50 mins. Whereas the 5d III uses about 3 hours maybe a bit more on the same amount of storage. I was completely surprised and I bought way more SD drives than I needed because I just remembered how fast they were running out in the last shoot. You can choose from two. They are all-i and the IPB. One is used primarily for editing while it uses more storage space, but the other uses less storage but is less indusive to editing (as Canon lists). But from my own experience, I thought the IPB performed very well in my editing suite. The D800 eats through storage space very recklessly and doesn't use a very efficient codec system.Here is the final breakdown that I would recommend.Go for D800If you need a Video camera to shoot studio shots in a controlled environment where lighting isn't an issue.Go for D700If you don't care at all about Video and all you care about is photos. Seriously the D700 is the best thing out right now and it just got a lot cheaper. If I wasn't a video professional, the D700 would be my pick if video wasn't my concern.Go for 5dIIIIf you shoot video in outdoors settings or indoors with bad lighting and you have no control of the environment. This is especially great for a rogue documentary filmmaker.This is just a short brief detail of what I think of these cameras. I don't hate or like Nikon or Canon. I am partisan to both and only care about performance. So with that being said, you should buy the camera that suites the type of shooting you need.What really won me over was the battery life and how i never have to worry about running out of storage. I shoot in long shoots and just need the extra security. And I have 4 batteries to boot and 200 gigs.

I have thought a long while about whether the 5D3 or the Nikon D800 would be the best camera for me to shoot weddings. Both cameras are phenomenal and when using the best glass for each, I'd be very impressed if anyone could look at a photo and said that it came from a 5D3 or a D800. DXOMark is considered by many to be the authority on how cameras stack up. The rivalry between the 5D3 and D800 is well-known to those who are interested and DXO has actually even published an article on how they compare. DXO is known, however, to heavily favor Nikon bodies than Canon bodies where even some crop frame Nikon bodies are apparently 'better' than even the best Canon bodies. I believe that the DXO formula for what makes a high scoring camera is biased towards the Nikon but I don't knock their results. So here I'd like to address two main reasons why someone would want to get a D800 over the 5D3 from a person (me :D) who owns and is very happy shooting weddings with a 5D3:"The D800 has better dynamic range"-This is true. The D800 gives you very nice depths that the 5D3 can't spit out. However, this only happens at lower ISO settings. Take a look at the chart here: [...] You'll see that from ISO800 and up, the dynamic range of both cameras start to converge upon the same values. Weddings are action-packed and you can't afford to miss a moment thus you will need a high shutter speed to get the shot. I don't remember the last time I shot a wedding below ISO800 because I like more depth of field to my images and there must not be any blur. I tell people that if I didn't shoot weddings, I would have bought a D800. If you shoot in a studio or take photos of bridges and whatnot, the D800 would be an excellent tool for your use. But if you are doing action, there's really no difference in this department."The D800 has more megapixels"-This is true. If you need/want that many more megapixels, then the D800 is your camera. More megapixels is nice because you can crop a full sized image to the point where you won't even need a short telephoto for up-close shots. But if this is not as important to you, and you don't want huge raw files, meaning more hard drive space, get the 5D3. The one downside with the D800 is this, because your files are so large, the buffer during rapid-fire shots cannot keep up with the 5D3. Going back to my weddings - rapid fire shots are required all the time because you don't want to get a money shot with the main subjects blinking. A photogs worst nightmare!So there you have it. I'm pretty sure that my review was useless to you if you: are a Nikon fanboy/girl, never shoot above ISO800, need the best dynamic range for details, have lots of Nikon glass and like that the D800 is cheaper than the 5D3. Here are my reasons for why the 5D3 is nice for my purposes:1) Canon quality control beats Nikon (google Nikon D600 oil+dust, D800 left AF problem)2) Better burst firing capabilities3) Ergonomically more comfortable (but to each his/her own)4) Manageable file size + ability to do smallRAW and mediumRAW5) Canon has lenses that Nikon does not have or are not as good - 50L, 85L, 135L, 70-200 2.8L II. But Nikon makes a crazy good wide angle zoom - the 14-24. It just depends on what you like to shoot.6) With the right lenses, the 5D3 produces sharper images than the D800 (a DXOMark result)And lastly, for the record, I am not a Canon fanboy, just a shooter who wants the best gear for a particular purpose.

Wow, where do I begin.To start with, I've been a Nikon guy up until this point. Going back to my first SLR with the N80 film camera back in the day (god only knows how many rolls of film I exposed with that thing), to the D70, the D200, and the D7000. I was skeptical of all the hype around the 5D3, so being a cautious man I rented it and a 16-35 LII first. As soon as I held the camera in my hand, I knew I was hooked on the ergonomics alone. Further shooting continued to impress with it's amazing user experience, refined menus, and incredible autofocus performance. So I ended up buying a 5d3 along with a 35 1.4 L. (16-35 had too much distortion for my applications)Ergonomics:This thing fits your hand like a well worn glove. My hands are on the small side being only 5'7" tall, but even the big full frame body just snugs in my hand like it was custom designed for me. You really need to hold this camera to believe how ergonomically amazing it really is. It balances perfectly both with the 16-35L II and the 35 1.4 L. The physical buttons are very customizable, letting you configure the camera to make it's operation so intuititve, it just gets completely out of the way and let's you focus completely on shooting.User Experience:The top notch physical ergonomics and the customizeable buttons combine to make a user experience like I've never had before. I liken it to my Volkswagen GTI - everything is in the perfect spot and the product feels like it was designed to maximize the joy in the user experience. It really must be used to be believed.Refined Menus:Despite being a Nikon DSLR users since 2004 with the D70, I've never got used to Nikon's menus. On my D7000, changing anything takes me forever just to find the item. I've had the 5D3 for less than a week, and I can already find items right away. Maybe it has to do with Canon's method of Horizontally orienting the menus, instead of Nikon's veritical orientation. I'm really not sure, but I know for me the menu is so much more intuitive than Nikon.Autofocus Performance:Autofocus performance is simply stunning. I've heard it said in the photography world that Nikon has accurate and slow autofocus, and Canon has inaccurate but fast autofocus. I've used the 5D3 to shoot challenging indoor sports, and I'm blown away by it's speed AND it's accuracy. On both the 16-35 and the 35 1.4, the autofocus feels like it BITES into the subject. It's very confidience inspiring, letting you worry about important things like Light, Color and Gesture.Screen:While I admit that I have not personally tried a D800, several reputable review sites complain of it's green tinted dispaly. This is not confidence inspiring. The 5D3's display is just gorgeous - bright enough to see outdoors, responsive, quick, and accurate.Why I went with the 5D3 instead of the D800:After analysis, I felt like 5D fit my 'shoot from the hip' style of photography best. The d800, as evidenced in DxO Mark and other sources, cleary gives better technical IQ. But as most of my work is indoor sports and candid photography, the 5D was the clear winner for it's silent continuous AF-DRive mode, higher FPS (4 vs 6) in fast mode, user experience, and legendary canon autofocus.Conclusion:This camera was cleary designed with THE PHOTOGRAHER in mind. It becomes transparent , letting you focus on what matters - Light Color and Gesture. To me, this is the clincher. LCG are really what is most important in photography.Update 10.24.2012Color:I used to convert all my images to B&W when I shot Nikon. With this camera however, I find myself loving the way color images look. Colors are deep and smooth, without being overly saturated and harsh. I find myself using Silver EfxPro less and less. I'll A/B in lightroom between the color image and the B&W converted image, and the color image has some inexplicable ethereal quality that I love. Remember Kodack NC and VC film? This camera renders skin tones like NC, and colors like a slightly less saturated VC. It's a beautiful balance - it has a soul to it, like an old Fender Twin reverb tube guitar amplifer. Smooth and soulful.Now admittedly this could just be an evolution of my style, but I thought I would throw this in here and you can take it with a grain of salt. Also note that I think a lot of my love for this camera comes from my love of the 35 1.4 L that stays glued to it. Also #2, I always shoot RAW. So I can not comment on the camera's color modes or .JPG engine.Also #3, I've learned with this camera to "overexpose" by about 2/3 EV and turn down exposure by 1/3 to 2/3 in post. When you do this, the noise performance in the shadows is stunning.Update 01.11.2013I'm continually amazed at how clean the sensor says. Using the D7000 in the same environment I'm using the 5D3 in, I was forced to continually clean the sensors. The 5D3's sensor cleaner is quite effective - I have a sensor loupe, and even upon inspecting the sensor that closely I still hav