It HAS to be more than 5% of 5D Mark II owners that bought the camera for video. I have to think it was at least 25% of 5D Mark II sales were because of video, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was all the way up to 50% of the sales. (I bought my 7D mostly because of video.)

Zach, if the numbers were anywhere near what you suggest, Canon (or someone else) would have made a dedicated video body with a better ergonomics and a large 2k sensor that shoots ideal video instead of the down-sampled stuff we have to live with. They'd be crazy NOT to if they could sell hundreds of thousands of units. But the market is simply not there.

I live in a tourist town where all summer people drive up here and lug around their prosumer Canons and Nikons, with big old 70-200/2.8s (or 400mm beasts) to capture the wildlife and have never once seen anybody shooting video with theirs. Not once. And these are people from all over the world. And I get stopped all of the time with these same people asking about my LCDVF... "what is THAT thing for??!"

I can assure you, purchasing a DSLR primarily for video capture is a fringe activity compared to the millions of units sold for primarily shooting stills.

Regarding 1080p60, of course everybody wants it. Keep in mind that such a feature would go beyond a firmware update. It would require enough speed from the sensor, DSP, and storage system. It might also affect heat and battery life.

I'm really hoping that we will see some good exposure and focus aids like zebras and an inset magnified view. While 1080p60 takes real hardware ($$$), Magic Lantern has shown that such UI features can be done in firmware and are not costly.

Brian, if that is the case, why has Canon acknowledge that its video/film making features were ground breaking in the 5D II and that this tradition is carried forward and improved. Its because they know the 5D created a whole new class of DSLR user, and users that tend to buy on the heavy end with accessories too !.

Its very difficult to estimate the number of people who bought Canon for video, because most of them are using it for stills also.
Myself for example, bought it for both, but I would have get a Nikon if it didn't had the video feature, since I am a Nikon user since the 80s. As a result I also bought 2 7Ds, 3 Canon lenses, plus adapters for my Nikon lenses.
But if you see me on vacation, I mostly shoot photos with my 7D, because I don't find the idea of leisure videotaping appealing.
Canon hampered 5Diii not only by not having clean HDMI, but also by not incorporating the Hi bitrate of 1Dx. Chris Hurd had suggested, when 1Dx was out, that this will not be the best Canon DSLR option for video and we should wait for the next 5D model. Evidently Canon proved him wrong. Apparently Canon thought, that photo journalists who shoot video must enjoy better video than studio users. But at $6K 1Dx is very expensive as an alternative to a dedicated videocamera, especially with the option of FS100 and the newly launched lens adapters.
Usually market leaders tend to overcharge for their products and Canon did exactly that with all her new outings. But the way the market is saturated, that could be a risky path.
What would have been an instant order of the new model on my behalf, now is a wait and see decision.

So what happened to the "EOS C" that Canon showed at the C300 unveiling -- did that end up being the 1DX or is it yet something to come..?

http://www.dvinfo.net/news/new-canon-digital-slr-camera-under-development.html

-- peer

Brian, if that is the case, why has Canon acknowledge that its video/film making features were ground breaking in the 5D II and that this tradition is carried forward and improved. Its because they know the 5D created a whole new class of DSLR user, and users that tend to buy on the heavy end with accessories too !. I think Canon was surprised as anyone else about the gravitation of the film community to the 5D2. And if it helps sell a few thousand more bodies, why not? I'd still argue that we're a low fraction of typical users. And that video capabilities were originally put on DSLRs to facilitate photojournalists grabbing some add'l video along with their stills.

I've been using my 7D professionally for over two years, for corporate and broadcast work, and know of few other pros in my region that have adopted the form factor for day-to-day work the way that I have. I also teach an intro to DSLR video class at a regional learning co-op and most of my students have video-capable DSLRs of various makes and models, but they were all purchased for stills.

Other people's circles may well be different, but I feel like I've garnered plenty of data in my particular region over the past two years. I've seen maybe 700-800 prosumer bodies being used for stills in the mountains, and around the cities here in Colorado, and at kids' sporting events, and can count only two times I've seen someone shooting video with their DSLR. If it's a revolution, I'm sure not seeing it here.

If you have other data and observations, please share them.

Sareesh, you're teetering on the edge of trolling, here. If you don't like the look of FF, prefer the look of your GH2, and think that the C300 "barely makes the grade", then what are you really contributing here? Each camera is vastly different than the next, and tailored to vastly different market segments. Until I've filmed something similar with each of them, I'll withhold judgement.

You are right, I shouldn't be so negative. Thanks for reminding me.

I agree with you on the rest.

The GH2 is an ergonomic nightmare. In my hands it feels like a tiny little plastic toy.

It does in my hands too, which is why I didn't buy it myself.

I think Canon was surprised as anyone else about the gravitation of the film community to the 5D2. And if it helps sell a few thousand more bodies, why not? I'd still argue that we're a low fraction of typical users. And that video capabilities were originally put on DSLRs to facilitate photojournalists grabbing some add'l video along with their stills.

Canon put video in as an after thought after they figured out how to do live view in a DSLR. They were totally surprised by the fact that video people went crazy over it, when it was supposed to be just a "novelty" feature for still photojournalists.

I'm sure they've have been pleased with the profits they've generated. But I just don't see them responding as well as Sony, Panasonic & Nikon have responded in giving people the features they want (*cough... clean HDMI *cough *cough)


I've seen maybe 700-800 prosumer bodies being used for stills in the mountains, and around the cities here in Colorado, and at kids' sporting events, and can count only two times I've seen someone shooting video with their DSLR. If it's a revolution, I'm sure not seeing it here.

If you have other data and observations, please share them.

Just look at DVInfo, there is more interest when a new DSLR gets announced than when a video new camera gets announced. This thread has gotten more traffic in 24 hours than JVC's 4K camera has in a month.

Even more, Televisual put the 5Dii on their top ten most rented cameras in 2010 & 2011.
Televisual | HOMEPAGE (http://www.televisual.com/read-online/The-top-ten-rental-cameras_rid-21.html)
Televisual | HOMEPAGE (http://www.televisual.com/read-online/Top-10-Rental-Cameras_rid-32.html)

Tourists & soccer parents aren't the people I consider video professionals that are buying still cameras for professional usage. Video professionals are selling their HVX200s & their EX1s to purchase a DSLR rig. That says something big.

I bought my 7D because it does stills & video, but the deciding factor on why I got the 7D & not another DSLR was the video. I think there is a large percentage of customers Canon won in the last couple years that shared my decision rational.

I agree with you that I would much rather have hard data of the 5Dii than just my observations. Second to that data, I'd love to see some analysis of sales of the D800 vs 5Diii, and how much a clean HDMI signal influenced those sales.

No, Zach, but tourists and soccer parents make up the 95% that I'm talking about (gross sales) for prosumer cameras. Not to mention photographers themselves, pro and semi-pros, and wannabes. And, as I intimated, of a dozen or so of my peers in video production, I don't know a single one other than myself that use a DSLR on a regular basis. If you know some that gave up their EX1 & EX3s for DSLRs, I don't. One I know uses a RED, but she's a filmmaker. The others stick by their tape and tapeless pro HD cams, since they want timecode, sync XLR sound, zebras, long-form, form-factor, pro codecs, etc. Kids in college that want to make a film would surely gravitate toward DSLRs for their filmic qualities, but as for most pros that make $ with their gear... I'm in a tiny minority lugging around my 7D and Tascam, rigs, and do-dads.

Until shown otherwise, I just don't think the numbers are there. Naturally sites like this are going to have a preponderance of DSLR video shooters. But I'd still say we're in a VAST minority to those that buy the bodies to shoot stills.

But at the ratios you estimate, someone would have built a large sensor video camera for us (that does NOT cost $16k). But they haven't. So I think we're a terribly small percentage. And I'll stand by that until shown otherwise.

FWIW, clean-HDMI out isn't terribly important to me. The Canon codec is good enough to make me $ with my DSLR every day and turn around an edit in hours. I just want to kill the moire' and step-up to FF goodness. Everyone has different needs and desires in their gear.

When the D800 and 5D3 come out, I'll do a day rental on them and run them through their paces to decide which one to buy. It's a VERY good time to be a professional (or hobbyist) in this field.

Zach, if the numbers were anywhere near what you suggest, Canon (or someone else) would have made a dedicated video body with a better ergonomics and a large 2k sensor that shoots ideal video instead of the down-sampled stuff we have to live with. They'd be crazy NOT to if they could sell hundreds of thousands of units. But the market is simply not there.

I think this is a faulty supposition. They know only too well, I suspect, that you are likely to do just as well, perhaps better, in the long term by apportioning out progress than by jumping to the greatest camera theoretically possible. We hear this every time something new comes out. In this or the C300 topics it's always "Why aren't they releasing some all conquering thing for cheap?" from someone. I suspect it's not as easy as we often think, for reasons practical and economic. But I don't know exactly why.

Besides, when you're already winning there's no real call to go out and crush the opposition in one fell swoop. That's just the sort of thing that sinks companies when they take a small misstep doing that. It's fine for small up-start start-ups and so on to be vastly innovative at every turn. It's probably the only way they'd get a look in. The others, not so much. We kid ourselves that redirecting an entire R&D and production line to making things we want is a straightforward affair in a massive multinational.

As to the video question, we've forgotten the impact of these things already and take them completely for granted only a few years later. When I got out of school everyone was still hoping they might pool their resources or save like mad to that first ten grand video camera, which was probably only HDV. If you'd said to anyone why isn't there a true 1080 camera for under five grand that can use photo lenses they would have laughed in your face.

The last shoot I was on there were 3 5Ds on set, only one was actually used for photography. If you'd got everyone to bring their canons along there would have been ten or eleven of them; various 5ds, 7d, 60d et al. About 3 used for photography on a regular basis. This was just a little ten minute thing with no money.

I have no numbers, only impressions. But I know that Canon DSLRs are so ubiquitous in the video circles I walk that they are now a little embarrassing. The 5D II was always the one to have of the line. Every school now has a few; any highchool and university with a media department. They are probably the first 'video camera' a lot of people touch these days, outside of their phones.

Pros might sniff at the video quality and the practicality, but they were leagues ahead of just about anything that would have been doing the same job at the bargain basement level only a year before (and frankly they are only deficient in areas most people really don't care about, especially when you factor in the cost of anything significantly better). Every film student bought one. You need only glance around and the snobbish mockery along the lines of "Got a 5D/7D and thinks he's cinematographer!" that the internet is loaded with to get an idea.

And for all that there's still loads of weddings and so on shot with them. 4gig clip limit? Get two! You're still in front. I know several wedding/corporate/commercial start ups built around them (people might say they're tasteless and doomed, but that's not really the point is it). I handy-cammed a christmas lights show last year and there were a couple of dual Canon shooters alongside the guys with the big broadcast camera.

So, as I said, I have no numbers, but I do think that under estimating how many people are into these things for the video would be a mistake. So why aren't they being served with more specific features? Well, I don't know. On one level I think you could say they don't need to. People are still buying 5DIIs for the video (and to some extent the big sensor rep). If you're a dedicated industry watcher you could think its old news with nothing exciting to offer, but I think the trickling of this quality of video to every corner it can fit isn't done yet. Such things move more slowly than the daily barrage of whiz bang press releases and internet buzz would suggest. They are still what a generation of would be film(video)makers wanted and couldn't get: manual control at a low price, and Canon are the biggest name in the game.

So what happened to the "EOS C" that Canon showed at the C300 unveiling -- did that end up being the 1DX or is it yet something to come..? Something yet to come, separate from the EOS 1DX.

New Canon Digital SLR Camera Under Development at DVInfo.net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/new-canon-digital-slr-camera-under-development.html)

do you know if it can record video with the crop/magnification like T3i?Sorry, I don't think it has that feature.

Sorry guys, no real pleasant surprises. YMMV.

Gapless sensor, 17x faster processing, no more line skipping, no more 4GB
clip limit, reduced moire, a headphone jack, these aren't pleasant surprises?

That "something yet to come" is still intriguing indeed. I'd love to have that many pixels to work with (re-framing and movement) in a 1080 frame. Considering the pentaprism and form-factor, it will also no doubt shoot stills, too. I'm not sure why Canon is going with an APS-H sensor on it, if they're trying to sell a bunch to filmmakers. There's not a real analog for that sensor size comparing it to motion picture film sizes and focal lengths like there is with FF=Vista Vision and APS-C = S35. Strange. Maybe a variant of the sensor in the C300 will morph into their 4K cam for cinema.

I live in a tourist town where all summer people drive up here and lug around their prosumer Canons and Nikons, with big old 70-200/2.8s (or 400mm beasts) to capture the wildlife and have never once seen anybody shooting video with theirs. Not once.

Brian, that's only true because you have yet to invite me over! :-)

That said, I'm still not convinced I need to upgrade from my 5D mk II.

Julian

You come on up anytime, Julian. We'll bring the revolution to the unwashed masses!

Timecode, clip length, a yet-to-be A-B'd reduction in moire' and artifacting, and an HD output during recording for pulling focus with a field monitor either makes it worth $1k for you or it doesn't. It's an easier choice for me to supplement my crop body w/ a FF one. I just have to decide if it's gonna be the D800 or the Mkiii

Anyone knows if the mkIII got the option of changing the shutter to start/stop video, like the 1Dx?
Would be nice to use a remote to start/stop...

Gapless sensor, 17x faster processing, no more line skipping, no more 4GB
clip limit, reduced moire, a headphone jack, these aren't pleasant surprises?

No more line skipping has been confirmed?

Gapless sensor, 17x faster processing, no more line skipping, no more 4GB
clip limit, reduced moire, a headphone jack, these aren't pleasant surprises?

The most pleasant surprise is that no one has complained it isn't the same price as a T3i!

The most pleasant surprise is that no one has complained it isn't the same price as a T3i!

Oh Dylan, Dylan -- here's a complaint for you; initially I was dead set on getting the 1DX but wanted to see what the 5D3 had to offer... (which, to me, again was a letdown similar to the C300) -- but then, today, Mr. Hurd rekindled my quest, telling us that the EOS-C is in fact still in the pipe. So I've returned to 'the waiting game' mode.

-- peer

Regarding the 4K DSLR, I'm thinking that I would only wait for it if I really wanted 4K. Odds are that it will deliver great looking 4K, but I would guess that it won't do 4K 60p. It will probably be 8-bits. It will probably be 4:2:0.

That's the way this stuff is usually rolled out... incrementally.

Now, Canon might surprise me, but for now, I would expect 4K as the only big, new feature.

And, yes, that will be great for anybody shooting video that won't need extreme processing that has a target of the big screen or 4K TVs. Also, given 4K resolution input with a 1080p target, you can get GREAT 1080p with the ability to crop at will.

On the luma side, you get four 4K pixels for each 1080p pixel. That's like having 10-bit resolution and two extra stops of noise reduction when you downsample to 1080p. On the chroma side, 4:2:0 @ 4K delivers 4:4:4 1080p. S'not bad...

Also, we know that we'd be getting all the pixels. That means proper anti-aliasing for sure.

So 4K with no other upgrades could still be pretty sweet. And maybe it will do 1080p60...

And proBably 4K raw
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/504907-canon-4k-raw-codec-patent-application.html

If the c300 is circa 15-16k, doesn't it stand to reason the cinema 4k hdslr (if not vaporware) would roll out around 20+k? In any case way out of my league. Would have like to seen a camera with 1080 48/60p at a little over 1920 for post stabilization - because I'm too lazy to use a steadycam most of the time! WITH clean hdmi out...

Still, JVC has falconbridge, maybe they can spur some competition, or sony or panny will bring something to the table soon..tired of this crippling thing....folks have been asking for hdmi recorders since 2006/hdv...now they're here, no clean hdmi (apart from d800/d4, with possible line-skipping moire etc.)...I remember this especially as an early adobter of the hv20...decent codec was the thing...

Canon essentially don't want their dslr's to be potentially used for broadcast - even small independent productions - it's 'buy a c300' (or fs100 more like) or their smaller-chipped videocams...

edit: yes aware of 'house', act of valor, danfung dennis etc..

4K especially if it were RAW would give us events shooters the capability of just taking stills off the timeline so delivering photographic work & doing two jobs at once. We would offer combined video & photographic packages & be shooting 25 stills per second. I was all fired up with the original promise of Scarlet for just this reason but a 4K camera from Canon would be a far preferable option.

I'm in. Sent my order into B&H... like 392,000 other people probably also did. :)

Would rather be wise and wait till others have discovered any issues first.

I shall now look forward to decreasing prices for a Mark II. :)

The most pleasant surprise is that no one has complained it isn't the same price as a T3i!

Why should they?

Would rather be wise and wait till others have discovered any issues first.

Im jumping in... If it really has issues, they'll creep up well within BH's return window! I do a lot of still photography too and want a full frame to go with my 7D.
Plus, somebody's gotta test the thing! I'll be performing the overheating tests here in Hell...I mean Phoenix...once summer arrives!

Would rather be wise and wait till others have discovered any issues first.

Nah. Where's the fun in that?

Why should they?

That was a joke based on the endless threads we had about people being angry with the C300 prices. Ya had to be here I guess.

Go forth early adopters, so pov-o scum like me can shop wisely.
If I have seen greater savings than those who have come before, it is only by standing on the shoulders of giant pixel peeping blog posts!
Huzzah to you.

Also, we know that we'd be getting all the pixels. That means proper anti-aliasing for sure.
I'm not sure I follow that. I'm assuming you mean that because it's 4k, all the photosites on the chip will be read every frame? If the recording is RAW, that could start to be feasible, because it moves the processing bottleneck from camera to computer, so yes, that's possible.

But it would also follow that the chip would be approximately 8 megapixel, as with the C300. Yes, it will work well for video, but will an 8 megapixel DSLR sell......?

Yet again it's a case of trying to engineer a good stills and video product in the same device seemingly leading to conflict. Optimise the video performance and expect still performance to suffer, and vice versa.

If it's 4096 wide (though it might be 3840), S-Video, in a 2:3 aspect sensor, it would be 2731 tall. That would be 11.8 MP.

If the camera records 4K from an S-Video window in a FF sensor, the width would be 1.6x 4096 = 6554. In a 2:3 sensor, the height would then be 4369. That would be a 28.6MP sensor.

RED EPIC/SCARLET-X does 4K at S-Video and 5K at roughly APS-H size, so there is precedent for this sort of thing.

There are a few ways for Canon to skin this cat.

BTW, marketers like MP because it increases with the square of the linear size. But we humans perceive resolution linearly. A 4K wide still isn't a huge loss of resolution compared to the 5616 wide stills from the 5D2, but 11.8MP sounds a whole lot worse than 21MP.

Yet again it's a case of trying to engineer a good stills and video product in the same device seemingly leading to conflict. Optimise the video performance and expect still performance to suffer, and vice versa.

David, you made an excellent case for this on the D800 thread, but a spec I'm very curious about on the 5DIII is the sensor width: 5760 = exactly 3x1920.

Care to chime in on the potential significance of this; on the face of it Canon seems to have arranged the sensor configuration of a stills camera to in some way improve video requirements. ie: the 1mp bump was specifically to produce superior video scaling, in which case it seems Canon is taking us video folk pretty seriously in this release.

What is this spec likely to mean for how video is arrived at? Am I reading too much into this?

Josh, I don't think you're reading too much into the 3x1920 width. With square pixels that allows a 3x1080 height in Movie Mode.

I'm thinking that Canon isn't necessarily reading all the pixels into the DIGIC 5 DSP. It's possible that the chip allows the reading of three summed lines of pixels. That way the chip, lines, and processing don't need to all be 3x faster. It can treat a 3x3 area as one super pixel, reducing aliasing dramatically. The optical anti-aliasing filter would still be a bit too sharp, but the aliasing would be much better controlled and the light sensitivity much better than with the line skipping method.

I don't know for a fact that is what they are doing. It's just an educated guess.

Frankly, it would be a great way to deliver nice looking video as well as crisp photos from the same system.

I'm thinking that Canon isn't necessarily reading all the pixels into the DIGIC 5 DSP. It's possible that the chip allows the reading of three summed lines of pixels. That way the chip, lines, and processing don't need to all be 3x faster. It can treat a 3x3 area as one super pixel, reducing aliasing dramatically. The optical anti-aliasing filter would still be a bit too sharp, but the aliasing would be much better controlled and the light sensitivity much better than with the line skipping method.

I don't know for a fact that is what they are doing. It's just an educated guess.

Very interesting... can't wait to see some full res comparisons of the 5DIII against the Nikons... could this sensor configuration give the Canon a meaningful advantage. If so, how will the 1DX stack up?

It's curious indeed that Canon hasn't made any mention of the sensor width matching 3xHD. Perhaps they don't wish to antagonize stills photographers (the primary market for the camera) by highlighting how the sensor *appears to have made* a clear concession to video demands.

Addendum: Jon do you ever sleep?

I sleep, but I usually don't remember it. :)

I don't know if it is hilarious or sad, but the sensor with the best pixel management is inside a smartphone:

http://europe.nokia.com/PRODUCT_METADATA_0/Products/Phones/8000-series/808/Nokia808PureView_Whitepaper.pdf

Even at the end of the digital Zoom In, the HD image is composed out of 8mp+ with full RGB. Not to mention the ability to derive multiple field of views from a single lens.

I've been following the announcement and this thread along with lots of stuff all over the web - but I don't think this 5DMkIII video has been mentioned yet on DVinfo. Sure, like one of the official Canon films, it features yet another sport I've no interest in - but some of the shots look pretty good to me!

Canon 5D EOS Mk III: Lion City Rollers (Test) on Vimeo

EDIT: Updating Vimeo Link to a newer version.

Nah. Where's the fun in that?



That was a joke based on the endless threads we had about people being angry with the C300 prices. Ya had to be here I guess.

OK :)

What about thos EOS C I have heard of?

After waiting so long for the 5D Mark III, I guess I was hoping for even more improvements over the orginal 5D Mark II.

The problem with moire, especially when filming moving ripples on water, has been a bit of headache in some scenes and hopefully with the Mark III it will be a thing of the past.

Are the other improvements enough to make me want to buy the Mark III, or would it be better to stick to an extra couple of Mark II bodies or/plus lenses for a similar price? Decisions, decisions! :)

The biggest factor for me is the latest Nikon D800, which also has a great range of features for video and stills.

I'm looking forward to trying both the Nikon D800 and Canon 5D Mark III to see how they truly compare in a variety of situations for serious photo & video work.

If anyone has managed to already get their hands on both models, I'd be interested to read their views.

Canon doesn't lower prices.....they do offer instant rebates and I expect to see those coming or continuing for the mk II.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

Are the other improvements enough to make me want to buy the Mark IIIThey had me at "headphone jack."

The dedicated (7D-type) Video Start/Stop button on the new Mark III is a nice feature, but it may cause some problems for me. I use my thumb to access the start/stop function on the Mark II when I am filming underwater, and the higher point of the button on the Mark III body might prevent me from reaching it when inside the Scuba housing.

A question for anyone who has the 5D Mark III: Can the Menu be set so that the central "Set" button inside the Quick Control Dial can also start & stop video function (like it does on the Mark II), or can you ONLY start & stop via the newly placed small buton inside the video function toggle lever?

They had me at "headphone jack."

That's a great addition which we've all been craving for a long time, Chris. However, I tend to record sound seperately more often with the 5D (it provides the cleanest recordings), so am able to plug my headphones directly into the Zoom H4, or the Sony WRR-805 and WRR-810 headphone sockets, to monitor sound.

On the occasions when I record external mics directly into the 5D, I also use the Sescom LN2MIC-ZMH4-MON 3.5mm Line to Mic with 25dB Attenuator for Zoom H4N with Headphone Monitoring Jack. This avoids the hassle of having to match seperate source sound recordings during post editing, but I've never been able to also avoid some kind of hiss when recording to a DSLR, even with added extras like the Sescom cables.

Speaking of audio, I'm hoping my Tascam DR-100 can go from line out into a dialed-down setting on the 5D3. Or a padded cable. I'll then have some sync audio at 16 bits, and a master track on the Tascam at 24 bits, if I need better S/N. Zoom H4n should be similar, I'd imagine. Riding gain on one of these should be easier than at the camera, also.

No, Zach, but tourists and soccer parents make up the 95% that I'm talking about (gross sales) for prosumer cameras.

...

FWIW, clean-HDMI out isn't terribly important to me. ... Everyone has different needs and desires in their gear.


Then we're talking about different things. It sounds like you're saying 95% of DSLR sales are for non-professionals (seems off to me, but I'll agree that amatuers are the majority of sales). I'm just talking about 5Dii sales.

If you broke up the people who own a 5Dii into three groups: 1. video the reason to purchase; 2. video not affected purchase; & 3. video tipped the scale for purchase. I think 1 + 3 are greater than 2. All the professional still guys that I've talked to who have a 5Dii are in group 3 & not 2.

The real question is how large is group 1. To me the interest on these forums, the Televisual top ten rental lists, the AF100, FS100, F3, & C300 tell me that group 1 is a sizable group & valid market.

---

I agree, we each need different things. For me I do too much live video that it isn't a real video camera unless it gives me live video out.

The cinema and TV folks will certainly find clean HDMI out useful without a doubt. Not sure about everyone else though. I'm considering jumping over to the D800 from the 5dMkII for that reason alone but I realize I may be in the minority. The improvements in both cameras still need to be proven in the field though so I wouldn't expect a tsunami of buyers either way until we get more than the videos provided by marketing efforts.

Then we're talking about different things. It sounds like you're saying 95% of DSLR sales are for non-professionals (seems off to me, but I'll agree that amatuers are the majority of sales). I'm just talking about 5Dii sales.
Zach, I'm referring to video-capable DLSRs. The Canons, Nikons, Sonys, etc. But I'd still bet that the 5Dii specific numbers are still around 10% max. as purchased for dedicated video platforms. I've met maybe a dozen people with the Mkii and only one purchased it primarily for video. Many owners of the Mkii show up in my class to learn how to shoot video with it, and have barely touched filming with them because they found the footage shot "too jerky" or strobing, since they're photographers that think of shutter speed in terms of altering exposure.

Whether or not video capability influenced their purchase or not, I think it just too nebulous. It's hard to find competing products that DON'T also shoot video these days and buyers just say... "why not?" There's not a whole lot of options out there for FF stills, and many photogs REALLY want that capability. In the next few months, Canon and Nikon will add four new options, and that's great.

Ultimately, who knows, really, what this fraction of buyers are? I don't think even Canon does.

IMHO, Canon focused WAY more of its efforts in upgrading the stills side of the Mkiii than the video side, and maybe that alone indicates their audience. They could have easily put zebras and peaking in there, if they wanted to really sway some video-centric buyers. Or even NDs.

I give zero credence to the whole "they didn't want to cannibalize their video market" crowd. The DSLRs are a fraction of the price of the C300, and those of us that have gone through the pain of learning to shoot video on DSLR can NOT go back to an 1/3" sensor pro video cam. And some pros will own both a DSLR and a longer-clip small-sensor cam.

Nikon throwing their hat in the ring will bring some freshness to Canon's lineup, for sure, if they want to continue to attract the low-budget filmmaker crowd. Cue the "Dueling Banjos" music.

The improvements in both cameras still need to be proven in the field though so I wouldn't expect a tsunami of buyers either way until we get more than the videos provided by marketing efforts.

Exactly, I'm waiting for field testing to see if the D800's HDMI will be a noticeable improvement in video, and if the refinements in the video compression on the 5DIII are worthwhile. I do have a budget for another camera shortly here, but I want to see some pixel peeping eye candy before I make any judgments.

The dedicated (7D-type) Video Start/Stop button on the new Mark III is a nice feature, but it may cause some problems for me. I use my thumb to access the start/stop function on the Mark II when I am filming underwater, and the higher point of the button on the Mark III body might prevent me from reaching it when inside the Scuba housing.

A question for anyone who has the 5D Mark III: Can the Menu be set so that the central "Set" button inside the Quick Control Dial can also start & stop video function (like it does on the Mark II), or can you ONLY start & stop via the newly placed small buton inside the video function toggle lever?

Hi Tony, I shot with the 7D and on my Ikelite housing they put an arm that trigger the start/stop and you don't need to move your hand from the hadle. I can trigger video and photo without moving my hand.

...but I would also like to know if you can change the video trigger to other buttons... Especially to the shutter so you can use a cabel remote.

Guys, I live in New York not far from B&H and Adorama. I have spoken to employees in the photo section many times, before I purchased my DSLR, when I purchased it, and afterwards. Here is the scoop:

DSLRs are very popular with videographers. However, they told me that most of the people coming in to buy DSLRs are photographers, not video people.

So according to my unscientific poll at two of the largest camera retailers in the world, lots of videographers and video enthusiasts have been buying DSLRs, but the majority of DSLRs are purchased by photographers and photo enthusiasts. (Sorry for the redundant sentence.)