Thank you Kenneth for emphasizing something I've been trying to get folks to realize since Oct. 2008.

I agree that the primary purchaser of the model is intended to be a still shooter, but Canon is also intending this camera along with the entire EOS line serve as their low end large chip video fleet to. Evidence ? They don' t have camera like the VG10/VG20 models or FS100 rig, and they are actively, now, pushing these cameras as their models for those purposes. Thus, because of the that marketing choice, we as users do have the right to complain about the things that are lacking. If these are intended for still purposes only, why so much time devoted at DVInfo, to those cameras ?

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.
Fair point, but I still think even that would be seen as lacking in a DSLR as far as stills go. It's what I meant by to engineer a camera for quality video AND stills, it's difficult not to compromise one.
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.
Interesting thought, and I can see the logic.

But there is a snag, and that would be a compromise as far as lenses go. If you bought primarily for stills (and FF), the windowing for s35 would make them all far more telephoto for the windowed sensor. Ideally, you'd need a second set of lenses for video, matched to s35 coverage. It's possible, but I can see a lot of people just deciding to get a second camera, specifically designed for video!
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
It could be very relevant, but there's only so much you can deduce from the numbers.

Have you read Alan Roberts report on the C300? ( http://blog.creativevideo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/canon_c300_alan_roberts.pdf )

What's relevant to this discussion are guesses he makes about how the 720p output on the C300 MAY be derived from the sensor - bottom of page 13. He wonders if it's exactly what you're proposing here (sensor dimensions exactly three times the output resolution)
Each pixel group contains either 4 or 5 green photo-sites, 1 2 or 4 red, and 1 2 or 4 blue. ....... In principle, it would be possible to sum relevant photo-sites in each pixel and normalise the values pixel by pixel, but this would produce a fixed pattern of coloured noise which would probably not be acceptable.
Of course, what "would probably not be acceptable" in a broadcast video camera may be OK for video from a DSLR! Obviously (as I've said before) going to 4x1920 by 4x1080 would theoretically be a very good way to go. But maybe 3x is all that current technology allows......?

I agree that the primary purchaser of the model is intended to be a still shooter, but Canon is also intending this camera along with the entire EOS line serve as their low end large chip video fleet to. Evidence ? They don' t have camera like the VG10/VG20 models or FS100 rig, and they are actively, now, pushing these cameras as their models for those purposes. Thus, because of the that marketing choice, we as users do have the right to complain about the things that are lacking. If these are intended for still purposes only, why so much time devoted at DVInfo, to those cameras ?

I'm certainly not implying that the online video community shouldn't complain, criticize, or ask for a given capability on a DSLR. My reply was more directed to a discussion above about the primary market for DSLRs and the percentage of photographers vs. videographers who buy them, I guess in relation to how much Canon targets video features when rolling out a new model.

I do think that video is still more of an add-on feature to a DSLR, albeit a much more important one than 4-5 years ago.

In regard to your point about Canon not having a video-dedicated large sensor camera like VG-20, I think that will be remedied by the impending C-line of cameras. I expect that I won't be able to afford the first camera that comes out (I am not counting the C300.), but I think eventually Canon might have an entire range of C-cameras like they do for DSLRs.

That's the point I've been trying to make for a few pages on this thread, Kenneth, so thanks for your feedback and observations. DSLR video shooters, despite all of the websites, books, YouTube & Vimeo videos touting, analyzing, and prognosticating on DSLR video, represent a very small percentage of DSLR camera buyers.

I, too hope for a dedicated line of EOS Cinema cams, but I fear that the same small numbers of buyers will keep the cameras in a higher profit-margin territory, and sell for much higher premiums than the DSLRs with their compromised sensors, features, and form-factors (and 10x to 100x the volume).

Now, I know that I WOULD pay $4-5k for a FF, 2k sensor video camera with XLR, scopes, zebras, NDs, etc. recording to MXF. But twice that? No, I'd probably make due with the 5D3 and all of its compromises and spend the extra $ on lighting, sound, or payments on a nicer car, accepting the "75% as good" footage I might get out of a DSLR.

It's simple. Smaller numbers of buyers mean higher prices or lesser features on the video side of DSLR. I'm not complaining. I'm much happier shooting large sensor video than I was when, umm... I... wasn't. And knowing that there's FOUR new FF DSLR camera bodies from two staunch competitors coming out this Spring that happen to shoot video, makes me very happy indeed.

I do wonder if making things more video oriented is quite difficult, for various obscure reasons.
Sure adding zebras, peaking and other Magic Lanternish stuff seems fairly straightforward. But chucking on other things may just have started pushing it up into 4.5-5000 territory where they didn't want it to be.
That was Red's lament about the Scarlet, if I recall: "We thought we could work out how to mass produce a pro-sumer 4k cam-corder. We were wrong". So Canon aren't going to step too far outside this camera's safety zone in any case.
The FS100 seems like the first real attempt to lure DSLR cheapskates ( o / )up a little bit. Plus, as mentioned, you don't have to try too hard too please, low budget filmmakers anyway. They'll come for the picture:price ratio and work around everything else.
What am I talking about? I don't know really. I'll be curious to see where the C100 lands in all this I suppose. I'm worried it can't be so good that it'll rival the C300. But then what'll it be? Stuff for another thread perhaps.

It has been written all over that the 5D ii was a surprise sales success to everyone (including Canon) when it comes to its video ability. But this doesn’t add to the number of cameras sold to photographers as much as takes away from the sales of camcorders.

I meet quite a few photographers and I can tell you most have not even tried the video function on their camera (regardless of maker) and the few who have tried it, quickly realized that computer wise, they are woefully short in horsepower.

Going from a proper video camera and editing computer to a DSLR is much easier than a photographer learning DSLR shooting and techniques, equipment, video-editing software and hardware. Can you think of a camera that requires more add-ons and whiz bangs?

This camera wasn’t a success because photographers felt they could get into the video business, it was videographers using what was previously sold as a digital camera that oh-by-the-way shoots pretty darn good video.

If we are being honest with ourselves, it would be the LAST camera type you would recommend to a beginner, unless you REALLY didn’t like them. So yes, for any ex-spouse it’s perfect.

I’m probably like most on here and own a couple of DSLR cameras. I have a T3i and 5D ii and like their capabilities. I carry one on a day to day basis, mostly for photos but it can serve as a back-up in a pinch, which it has. But it is far from the first camera I would grab and just about the last camera you would want to hand-off to an assistant to capture an important moment.

The niche, and yes it’s a small one, is the cinematic or creative one where low light and/or shallow depth of field are the norm. Which may I add is getting rather old and can’t wait until I’m no longer subjected to out of focus footage being portrayed as “art” (I also waited too long to buy a slider, I hate that move now too.)

The truth of the matter is we all should probably be enrolled in some sort of 12 step program for new camera junkies. I know I have a problem. I already own five Canon cameras and have been going over this thread like it contained the next Power Ball winning numbers. Some of the calculations for sensor size and possible image quality on here make my head hurt and seeing the times posted makes me think there are others who may want to join my new program.

The market for professional camcorders is small and the market for DSLR video is tiny. I live in upstate New York in a county with over 800,000 people and if you want to actually look at XA10, XF100 or XF300 you need to make a trip to New York City. (Or you can call me and I could show you mine but that just reinforces my need to get cracking on the first step of the program.) For that matter I cannot even find a CF card locally that will work in the XF camera.

But I will be able to get my hands on a 5D iii at the local camera store because this town if full of photographers and this is really a digital camera that just happens to shoot video. I called my local camera store yesterday and when they found out who it was they started laughing. “We knew you would be calling and we already put your name of the first one.” That was a big relief.

Now that I know where I am in line I need to put my 5D ii on Ebay pronto before everyone else does…….I think I may need an intervention.

David Chilson = post of the day. And it ain't even 9am yet!

+1, David!

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.

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.)

I think this is a case of the blind scientists & the elephant, we each only can report on what is in front of us. If we want to know what the elephant really looks like, we need solid data of the entire beast.

If Canon doesn't know what the 5Dii elephant looks like, they need to hire someone to look at the entire beast. Are video people making up 10% in sales from customers that would never have bought a DSLR? More? Less? Are they missing customers who want to buy, but need more video features? Are people buying DSLRs instead of XF300 cameras? Are people buying DSLRs for video & using them for stills? Buying for stills & using for video? ... ? ... ? ... ?

If Canon doesn't have these answers then they're making a mistake by having their "perfect Pepsi" when they should be looking for their "perfect PepsiS."

Malcolm Gladwell on spaghetti sauce | Video on TED.com (http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html)

Dang it Dave Chilson, I thought I had gotten over that need of a camera fix---- but now that you brought it up, I find my self starting to have that old feeling again.... yikes............

If Canon doesn't have these answers then they're making a mistake by having their "perfect Pepsi" when they should be looking for their "perfect PepsiS."

Malcolm Gladwell on spaghetti sauce | Video on TED.com (http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html)

Interesting stuff. I'm not sure it makes your argument though. In this example the elephant includes the entire Canon DSLR range at least, and probably their other cameras as well. There's another dimension I think the lecture didn't cover. I'd argue the electronics industry at large has been doing these sorts of things for the last decade at least. Ever increasing numbers of lines and price points bamboozle customers..But they've actually gone one better than those food industry examples and discovered X number of perfect Pepsis is trumped by X number of Imperfect Pepsis.
I'm not going to say this is outright cynical behaviour. There's surely some practical reasons in there as well. But I think by now electronics companies know that given a customer with, for example, five different criteria for a camera purchase, show them three camera options that cover only three of their criteria each in different combinations and they'll still buy one. These cameras then cover other customers' different critera in similarly imperfect ways. The set of features in the range overlaps imperfectly. No line is made entirely redundant by any other. No one spending less than beaucoup bucks gets entirely what they want. And even then...

If Canon doesn't know what the 5Dii elephant looks like, they need to hire someone to look at the entire beast.I suspect that Canon knows their own market a lot better than any of us possibly could. Huge multinational corps spend million$ in market research, and keep a close eye on what their competitors are doing.

Canon has always played conservative, and never been on the bleeding edge of anything. They typically let the other big boys come out with something, then they spend time developing, R&D'ing it, then bringing similar (and often better) technology out, sometimes as long as a generation later. Canon didn't come up with the idea of putting video in a DSLR body. Nikon did with the D90. A lot of folks forget about that. Canon improved DLSR video (over Nikon's implementation) with the 5D2, made huge leaps with the 7D and the 3 Rebel bodies, updated the firmware of the 5D2 at mid-point to give that body some of these improvements (leaving us 7D owners in the cold, apparently), and then developed the 5D3 that clearly makes more evolutionary change in the world of DSLR video.

I'd love to say that "this is Canon's game to lose" vs. Nikon, but I don't think a few thousand disgruntled Canon video shooters will make much of a dent on 5D2 sales if some of us move to the Nikon camp. Now, if the D800 ends up cutting-into their market-share because several tens of thousands of customers believe that that FF body shoots superior STILLS (or decides that the $500 extra the 5D3 costs them vs. the D800 isn't worth it)... then Canon will have to react to that.

The C300 draws a very visible line of demarcation between old, conservative Canon and a new breed of "bleeding edge" thinking, courting Hollywood with it. As has been said here, I sure hope it trickles down to a more-affordable C body for those of us that can't justify $16k for a video-centric large sensor camera. We'll have to wait and see...

Can anyone confirm if the 5DMkIII has a "crop" feature in video mode like some DSLRs? (e.g. 3x digital zoom effect).

I've seen some debate around the web as to whether or not it has this useful feature - but I can't help thinking Canon would have spelled it out very clearly in the official specs if indeed it does!

Chris Hurd has posted that it does not.
I find this unfortunate and wonder two things: why was this handy feature not included when a lower end model T3i has it, and also, could it be implemented in future firmware updates?
to me, it seemed like an advance like this should be included in all cameras hence forth... but then, i also thought the new 24-70 would include IS. silly me!

Can anyone confirm if the 5DMkIII has a "crop" feature in video mode like some DSLRs? (e.g. 3x digital zoom effect).

I've seen some debate around the web as to whether or not it has this useful feature - but I can't help thinking Canon would have spelled it out very clearly in the official specs if indeed it does!I had a 5DIII in may hands yesterday on the Canon stand at the Focus on Imaging show at the NEC in Birmingham here in the UK (the show finishes at 17:00 today if anyone still wants to pop along). I looked through all the menus that I could find related to video & didn't see any HD crop feature like the 600D/T3i. Otherwise the camera looked & felt great. Slightly re-arranged controls from the 5DII but felt much the same. There isn't so much space for fitting a loupe certainly not with a stick-on frame. Zacuto's gorilla plate that attaches to the tripod mount for fixing the Z-finder may be OK.

The only reason, I can think of, that the video section of the markIII is not radically evolved, is the iminent arrival of the 4k DSLR. Maybe within the 1st half of the year.

This also maybe the reason for the lack of 10bit out or 1080p50/60 on the C300

The only reason, I can think of, that the video section of the markIII is not radically evolved, is the iminent arrival of the 4k DSLR.

Yep, the 4k EOS-C is the only reason I put a hold on my intended 1DX purchase. Hopefully it's not all vaporware (just like the original Scarlet).

-- peer

Here's an APS-H sensor Canon developed. 120 mega-pixels... wow. Maybe something similar is planned for the 4k DSLR, who knows? Canon develops world's first 120 megapixel APS-H CMOS sensor: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/8/24/canon120mpsensor)

This also maybe the reason for the lack of 10bit out or 1080p50/60 on the C300

8-bits on the C300 was due to the development schedule. The C300 used an existing DSP. That defined the codec, bitrate, and 4:2:2, 8-bit signal. I think it's clear that the next Cinema camera will have a new DSP and better back-end formats.

The only reason, I can think of, that the video section of the markIII is not radically evolved, is the iminent arrival of the 4k DSLR. Maybe within the 1st half of the year.

This also maybe the reason for the lack of 10bit out or 1080p50/60 on the C300

I'm not sure why you would expect the video section to be radically evolved in the first place, regardless of any 4k DSLR or not.

Jon,
I'm saying the same thing. They must have something more advanced in the pipeline, that's why the relied on the older chip, in order not to undermine, the soon to be released cinema model.

Dylan,
At least they should have implement clean HDMI. Something every user craved for. If there isn't a soon to be released cinema model, both 1Dx and 5DIII would had one. Actually many video oriented users consider a switch to Nikon because of that.

Anyway, maybe the wait is almost over...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/09/canon-teases-exclusive-screening-at-NAB/

I fear Dylan is right. I think those of us who have been trying to shoe horn a DSLR into our old interchangeable lens camera duties will still be wanting. I would like nothing better than to have this DSLR phase in my rear view mirror and for Canon to get their camcorder division designing their next camera not the DSLR folks. You know, those crazy people who think a head phone jack, an XLR plug or two on the body proper and the correct switches and buttons easily accessible. Yeah, those guys.

The majority of my frustration stems from the fact that I have used a Canon camcorder with removable lens for over 20 years. Since the advent of solid state technology and Canon’s decision to only make a proper video camera with the lens affixed, I feel a little short changed.

With baited breathe, my empty credit card at the ready and with rampant rumors flowing about the new C300, I was poised to jump at first chance. Hold on there cowboy, even for an admitted Canon Crack addict it’s 16 grand and it doesn’t even have auto focus. It’s still ergonomically DSLR challenged and the audio appears to have been designed after it was packaged for shipping. Man did I get a pout face on……

The C300 was made up of XF and EOS parts and I’m having a problem trying to figure out if this camera is the removable lens version of the XF line, (H1 so to speak) the “holy grail” of the DSLR contingent or a whole new Cinema line altogether. I’ve been patiently waiting to see under which heading Mr. Hurd puts it in the forum.

Truth be told, I’m getting a little tired of waiting for the EOS line to morph into a proper video camera, especially when I feel Canon is actually close. The XF100 is a single chip camera with proper audio and video controls (few quirks notwithstanding) and lists for just under $3000. If you substitute an EOS mount where the lens should be one would think it would come in around the same price point, if not less.

Even more interesting would be a T3i with the 3X crop wrapped in the XF100 body. Now, we are diggin’ where there are taters! It wouldn’t be too hard one would surmise to put a 5D iii in there with room to spare and charge the price of the XF100 plus the 5D iii and list it for $6299. Put in some proper ND filters and the 3X crop factor and it’s $6999 all day long. The line forms right behind me…..

I need 4K about as much as I need a second Blu-ray burner. Not sure about everybody else but ever since I burned my first Blu-ray in June of 2006 I have been waiting for people to catch up. The XF codec is fine for the BBC and works for me. Maybe what I really need is just a better class of clients.

I don’t need another camera without XLR ports, fixed screen and functions so buried in the menu I need a “time out” to make adjustments or at least remember what unmarked or non descriptive button or dial I have reassigned to do something that used to be second nature.

So it looks like the cottage industry that sprung up a few years ago that sells the parts to make the audio, monitoring and support shortcomings of these cameras workable will still be in business. It should make those folks happy.

Why Canon decided to drive their video segment from the EOS line in this fashion as opposed to incorporating that success into their camcorders has to be based on profit not function.

I think Canon realized that at least from loyal Canon customers it wouldn’t take too many low cost incremental upgrades of essential video features to make us video types jump.

“They had me at head phone jack” pretty much sums up our level of expectations.

I would like nothing better than to have this DSLR phase in my rear view mirror and for Canon to get their camcorder division designing their next camera not the DSLR folks. You know, those crazy people who think a head phone jack, an XLR plug or two on the body proper and the correct switches and buttons easily accessible. Yeah, those guys. My take on this, based on my admittedly limited degree of familiarity with the American arm of this manufacturer, is that the video division has always been the red-headed stepchild of the company family, while the still photo division has always been the number-one son. Not long after Oct. 2008 when the 5D Mk. II was introduced, the two divisions were merged together. Or perhaps it might be more accurate to say that the pro video department was absorbed by the pro photo department. Allow me to point out that there are more than a few absolutely stellar people in the pro photo department (certainly not all of them, but more than a few). But they were not video-minded people, and to this day they still aren't, despite the video-photo merger. My point is, when those two divisions were brought together, guess who called the shots... the photo people. Who is in charge today of their new Hollywood office? People that used to be on the photo side. Hey, they are great folks, don't get me wrong. But none of them have any background in video, and all of them still have a lot of learning ahead. There are a couple of individuals I can think of from the video side that have much greater experience, are quite a bit more Hollywood-savvy and have a much better idea of what belongs in these camcorders, but the video division was not the star pupil of the family. So go figure. Then again, what the hell do I know, I'm just a guy with a web site. Never believe anything you read on the web.

The majority of my frustration stems from the fact that I have used a Canon camcorder with removable lens for over 20 years. Has it really been that long since the L1 first came out? I guess it has.

Since the advent of solid state technology and Canon’s decision to only make a proper video camera with the lens affixed, I feel a little short changed.I think what happened with this was, Canon looked at the number of XL and XL H bodies sold, and they looked at the number of other lenses and EF adapters sold, and came to the realization that fewer than 10% of all XL and XLH owners ever changed the lens on those cameras. And from that 10%, the majority of those lens changes were to the wide-angle. With the XF series, they probably figured they were covering most of the bases by offering an optional wide-angle adapter. On the XF305, there's already an 18x zoom range. With the optional Canon WA and then a third-party teleconverter, the rationale is that you don't need interchangeable. That is unless you're like me, one of those rare people who liked to use EF glass on an XL or XL H body. But there aren't enough of us to matter in that market from the only point of view that matters: sales.

The C300 was made up of XF and EOS parts and I’m having a problem trying to figure out if this camera is the removable lens version of the XF line, (H1 so to speak) the “holy grail” of the DSLR contingent or a whole new Cinema line altogether. I’ve been patiently waiting to see under which heading Mr. Hurd puts it in the forum.Yeah, me too. I'm waiting to see that as well.

Why Canon decided to drive their video segment from the EOS line in this fashion as opposed to incorporating that success into their camcorders has to be based on profit not function.Well, yes... bingo. It has to be based on profit. Without profit, there is no company. I mean they do their market analysis and they read this forum regularly and all that, but at the end of the day they have to make decisions that are driven by the bottom line. In a capitalist economy, that's the only way it can work. And that goes for all camera manufacturers, Japanese or American or whatever.

“They had me at head phone jack” pretty much sums up our level of expectations.Okay. I admit, I was purposefully being glib when I said that. The deal is, I have been their customer almost as long as you have, and I've had enough face-to-face at trade shows and whatnot, that I have managed to develop what I would call are realistic expectations about what they chose to do and not do on each product rev. I have learned to peel away the rind of cynicism from those expectations in order to expose the bittersweet realism that lies beneath. Here's what I have found:

a.) they are always last, or at least very late -- but what they do is usually very good.
b.) there's always some obvious or key element missing from any product's feature set.
c.) their products tend to be overpriced by 20% to 25% -- but they are usually very good.

So, yes, it's nice to see that they've finally added a headphone jack after having complained about it loudly to them for more than three years. And no, I'm not at all surprised that there still isn't a clean HDMI output (despite having complained about that too). Hopefully we'll see that on the next Cinema EOS piece, and hopefully sooner rather than later.

Geez, you should post more often David!

Just been looking at the high ISO images on the Imaging Resource Comparometer website.

(Just Google it as I don't want to link it directly on here).

All the Canon 5DMkIII test images through a wide range of ISO settings have recently been added - so you can now compare them side-by-side with the older Canon 5DMkII test images (and key cameras by other manufacturers).

Certainly shows improvement over the 5DMkII at high ISO. Comparison with my trusty 7D was dramatic too - looks like this new sensor and its image processing enables the 5DMkIII to see in the dark - almost! Impressive.

Just been looking at the high ISO images on the Imaging Resource Comparometer website.Those are JPG images not RAW. I don't know any professional photographer who shoots JPG in preference to RAW (OK there may exceptionally be special circumstances e.g. rapid fire) so we can't draw any conclusions. This does show what in camera conversion to JPG does which may hold some clues for video but until we get production cameras in the wild it's all speculation.

Yes I know that Nigel. If you follow a recent discussion thread on the dpreview forum you can now see some developing information using RAW images as the start point too - I think (comparing the 5DMkIII with Nikon D800).

Just to update that the 5D3 are in the market since last Friday in Singapore =) Street prices seem lower than US at SGD4200 ish.

I have my 5D3 came in today at Tape Works of Texas