Nikon D800 announced where is the Canon 5D Mark III?
Almost a week has passed from the announcement of the full-frame SLR Nikon D800 . Almost everything that the Nikonians had been waiting for almost a year is embodied in the new flagship (floor) of the professional Nikon line. The Japanese promise to start selling a new miracle in mid-March. What, however, is believed with some creak, after the story with a delayed release of the D7000.
The Canon EOS 5D Mark III, whose announcement was waited for at least a long time, did not come out from under the cover of secrecy. We'll have to take matters into our own hands. Let's fantasize, than manufacturers of belts with a red border, will be able to respond to manufacturers of belts with a border yellow.
Nikon announced $ 3,000 for the D800 and $ 3,300 for the D800E, perhaps the real price will be higher in Russia, for sure. It is possible that the Mark III price tag will be put slightly higher than that of Nikon for marketing reasons (“more expensive means better”). Because there are no other reasons to turn up the price tag.
Probability : $ 3,500 - 40%, $ 3,000 - 40%, <$ 2,500 - 10%,> $ 4,000 - 10%
')
Not even discussed. If only because the current semi-professional flagship 5D Mark II full-frame.
For reference. What is a full-frame (full-matrix) camera and what is its advantage over the “crooked” (literally - cropped) matrices? As the name implies, the physical size of the “full” matrix corresponds to the format of a film frame, approximately 36x24mm. The “crocs” of the matrix are smaller. Accordingly, with the same megapixels:
Because of this, owners of full-matrix cameras can “save” on optics. More effectively using expensive light-sensitive lenses. Plus save on short-focus wide-angle lenses.
The most technologically “simple” and accordingly “cheap” focal length is 50-55mm. With distance from the optimum price (as well as weight and size) optics greatly increase, especially with high sensitivity. Moreover, prices are rising in the “short” direction than in the “long”, and the size and weight vice versa. Owners of the Crop are left to be comforted that their telephones are more long-range for the same price. I note that lighter and cheaper optics are made specifically for reduced matrixes, which ... can be successfully put on modern full-frame cameras. Alas, with the loss of full-frame.
Probability : 99% of the camera will be full-frame (1% that Canon will close the full-matrix semi-professional line, focusing on the still-current Mark II).
Nikon's flagship Kropov D7000 matrix is ​​Sony. The same that is put on the Sony Nex 5. And although Nikon podshamanil something and optics for DSLRs are much sharper than for system cameras, still some soaping and moire of the matrix sometimes get out on fine details. The truth is much less than the Nex-s. Who made the optics for the new D4 and D800 has not been announced. But conspiracy therapists are delighted.
It is clear that "your" sensor leaves more possibilities. Reasons to put someone else's sensor (or announce it), there is no Canon.
Probability : 90% own sensor
Until now, the Canonists with the 5D Mark II and 21Mp, looked patronizingly at the Nikon D700 with a miserable dozen of Mn. In the new chamber, Nikon charged three dozen - 36Mp. Almost like a medium format camera.
How many megapixels will Mark III have? Actually I think that 25-32. A person who buys a camera for $ 3,000 either understands that the full matrix is ​​more important than a formal resolution, or buys a “status thing” (and relies more on the name of the camera, rather than on characteristics).
And 36 MP is already the ultimate resolution. Because rests on the possibility of optics. Let's count. Optics resolution is calculated in lines per millimeter. Nikon has 7360 points on a 35.9mm matrix, which is a little more than 200 points, that is, 200 lines per mm.
If we consider the Bayer filter, it is necessary to divide the number of lines by another two. At least the root of the two, at most two. But still, in the end, we get 100 lines.
Minimum. At least 100 lines, really more.
Believe, there are not many lenses that give such a resolution under the “ small format ”. There is even a suspicion that having released a camera with such permission, Nikon was going to buy Leica or Zeiss. That can not but rejoice, because German optics with Japanese autofocus will appear. Or Lake was going to buy Nikon, which can not please, because then Nikon's cameras will cost as Leykovskie.
Therefore, there is not much point in 37, 38 and especially in 40Mp. But who knows - marketers rule in this world.
Probability : 20% that the camera will be 36+ Mp.
The D800 has a relatively low rate of fire - only 4 frames per second (6 when using the battery pack). The reverse side of high resolution.
Make Mark III more nimble, at least up to 5 shots per second (20% "faster") is not such a difficult task. Perhaps this is the “cheapest” solution in “marketing” excellence. Especially if Canon doesn’t pull megapixels up to heaven.
Probability : 80%, which will be more than 4 shots per second
Maximum ISO sick for Canon theme. In low-light conditions, Nikon has been out of competition for several years. But there is an ISO, which is written in the annotation and there is an ISO, which is really working. Therefore, most likely, the necessary digits will be written on the Mark III box. What is the "working" ISO that the D800, that the 5D, will show the tests after the cameras.
ISO Min. Here you can do (and you can pretend) that the matrix works at 50 ISO. This is unlikely to give better pictures, but will allow you to work on an open aperture with an excess of light.
For reference: when you increase the ISO matrix begins to more aggressively catch photons. Naturally, this increases the likelihood of false alarms of the sensors and auto-sensing of the sensors (from heating the matrix). What translates into a “noise” that is well known to any photographer. For the same reason, it is considered. that the most high-quality photos are obtained at low ISO. But there are technological thresholds and if the matrix does not make noise at 100 ISO, then it will not make noise on 50 units. And in this case, lowering the ISO image quality will not improve. The D800 is exactly what happens. The minimum ISO is 100, but you can set 50.
Probability : 90% that the maximum ISO will be declared no lower than that of the D800. 20%, which will be the minimum working ISO <100. 60% that will be the minimum declarative ISO 50
It would be nice. Nikon has a dynamic range declared in 20Ev (as a measurement range, really less, judging by its D7000). Increasing DD is not easy, but if I succeed, I personally will strongly think whether I am such a stubborn Nikonian as a matter of fact.
For reference. Dynamic range is the difference between the darkest and the lightest clearly visible parts of the image. A typical example is a photograph against a window or sky on a bright day. Either the background is clogged with “milk”, or the details of “no background” become dark, sometimes to indistinguishability.
Probability : 25% that the DD Mark III will be wider than the D800
It’s time to change the shape of the case a bit (at least, the grip) and the location of the camera power button, so that the camera can be turned on without looking like a Nikon. I see no reason not to do this in 5D Mark III. All the same, when you are doing well (with ergonomics), while the main “enemy” is fine, it’s somehow uncompetitive.
Probability : 30% for changing ergonomics (70% because the Canon hasn't been soaring for several decades, but can it be time?)
Canon is traditionally free to distribute software for computer camera control (unlike Nikon, who wants a decent program for decent money). Probably, something will appear in the box for organizing and pre-processing photos more convenient than that of a competitor. In the end, selling a camera for 3000 green can be added to the box and licensed to Silkypix or even Lightroom.
Probability : 80%, which will be more high-quality and diverse software
This is a sore subject for me, so I’ll immediately say that Canon had, is and will have an advantage due to two things. First: a smaller working segment and a larger bayonet diameter. Because of what, you can put a greater amount of optics from third-party manufacturers on Canon, incl. the same Nikon. Second: extensive experience in the production of video cameras, moreover, of very high quality for various market segments. What else?
It is time. Sane tracking autofocus, I have seen so far only in Sony (well, relatively sane and the one on the mirrorless). What is not surprising - the SLR is not a video camera and optics is completely different. My D7000 autofocus is ... fun and independent. But sometimes it helps when laziness overcomes. In the D800, I doubt that autofocus will be much better. The third brand, respectively, too. But suddenly? It's time.
Probability : 90% autofocus in liveview
Nikon, finally, produces a camera for shooting in FullHD with 30 frames in progressive scan, and then already tired of falling into the "flicker" of 50 hertz lamps with 25 frames. And 60 frames in HD, which is also very good, better fast motion is “caught”.
What can Canon answer? Actually nothing. Such modes for him have already passed stage, but ... More resolution and a higher frame rate are needed by “filmmakers”, who are not so many in the total mass of buyers. And for professional video, let's say FullHD weddings - more than enough. Why are movies with a resolution of 3K or 4K , if they cannot be watched at home - there are no such monitors and televisions. And if they were, it would be hard to notice the difference with the naked eye.
Plus, greater resolution is competition with ourselves. Canon recently released a digital movie camera . Which, by the way, also rests on FullHD. Who will buy it for $ 15,000, when you can buy a fotik for $ 3,000 - $ 4,000. Perhaps the appearance of 2K video, which is slightly larger than FullHD, but can be announced a breakthrough.
Most of the frequency - cool, nothing more. Rather, the marketing feature for "slow motion" than the sought-after thing. You can do HD with 120 frames, everything else from the realm of science fiction.
Probabilities (cross) : HD x 120 - 20%, 2K - 15%, 3K - 10%, 4K - 5%
Also from the realm of science fiction, the dream of “filmmakers” about an uncompressed video. It is easy to calculate that uncompressed FullHD at 25 frames per second will produce a stream of approximately 200 MB per second (with 4 byte encoding). A 64GB flash drive will be clogged with three minutes of material, only ... this is where to get a flash drive holding such a stream and not trying to melt. However, external access to the Raid array is possible.Possible, but unlikely.
Upd: As indicated in the comments, I forgot about USB 3.0 (which by the way is present in the D800). If Canon realizes the output of an uncompressed stream via USB 3.0, then the “filmmakers” will forgive him for almost anything.
Upd: Again, from the comments - 1 Gigabit network interface is possible. Unfortunately, it will not close the uncompressed video stream even with three-byte encoding. Again, a camera with a network interface in a semi-professional niche ...
For reference: uncompressed video allows for more "sweeping" color correction, or other post-processing, which is influenced by coding artifacts.
A new codec or upgrade of the old is also quite possible.
Probabilities (cross) : uncompressed - 20%, new codec - 25%, TCP / IP 1GB - 5%
Canon like in such a disgrace was not noticed. For which he respects, but again, marketing, and suddenly someone wants 3D transitions between the movie clips directly on the camera.
Probability : 10% (and good)
Headache owners Mark II. The frame was caught, the lens turned, the confirmation squeaked, you look - everything is clear. You finish the descent. Cotton mirror. Opachki, and the focus has gone somewhere. Not that often, but there are five percent of such marriages for “pennies”. About the usual blunders when shooting "power" can not mention. As a result, the permanent shamanism with the settings.
If the problem is corrected in Mark III, then sales are guaranteed. At least at the expense of the owners of "two". I think, in Canon, they understand this very well, therefore we are waiting.
Upd: It’s very likely that the Mark III will receive 61 point autofocus systems (the D800 already has 51 points). However, besides the number of points, there is also a parameter “of them cruciform”, which Nikon has historically more. Therefore, it is impossible to say how it all works before the tests. So far, the fact that the Nikon D700 fewer misses than the Canon 5D Mark II.
Upd: It will be interesting if Canon remembers the “eye” focusing system when the camera follows the direction of the photographer’s gaze (especially if the photographer, like me, is wearing glasses at -7). Rather, it will be an advertising move, since the usual “cyclic” focusing allows you to quickly tell the camera what to focus on, but you want to dream. Especially such a function will be required for reporting, where it will allow you to quickly compose a frame, and not act according to the principle “focus is always centered, then cropped in FSH”.
Probabilities (cross) : 70%, that the Mark III will be less “miss the mark”, 10% that there will be a choice of the focus point by the “eye”
Nikon owners have a problem with charging batteries - remember where the "charging" is lying. Canon has no such problem. It's a pity. 4-6 hours of active work is very little.
Probability : 30% that Mark III batteries will be more capacious
I forgot the multipoint foxy system, eye focusing, GPS, USB 3.0. Something is corrected in the updates above, which "did not fit" below.
In the D800, as always, the GPS receiver was not turned on. Of course there is the opportunity to buy cheap and connect external, but I want everything at once. The presence of GPS out of the box will please the canonists. And the Nikonists will have to say that the camera is not a mobile phone where they can push as much as possible.
The presence of such an installation reduces the degree of elitism, but is incredibly convenient.
Probability: Built-in GPS: 20%
Nikon “returned” to the D800 a fire-igniting built-in flash (taken from the 700), which should surely please the “stroboscopists”. The answer must be adequate. We are waiting for the flash system management function for the Mark III.
Probability: 80% Mark III will get a flash control system
Here is a prediction. Let's see what we managed to guess. And although my decision to buy a D800 may not be affected by many factors (dynamic range, cinema resolution), I still look forward to the announcement of the Mark III.
Let there be a struggle ...
Upd : according to rumors from the canonrumors Mark III announcement, will be held on February 28 .
And what about Canon?
The Canon EOS 5D Mark III, whose announcement was waited for at least a long time, did not come out from under the cover of secrecy. We'll have to take matters into our own hands. Let's fantasize, than manufacturers of belts with a red border, will be able to respond to manufacturers of belts with a border yellow.
Price
Nikon announced $ 3,000 for the D800 and $ 3,300 for the D800E, perhaps the real price will be higher in Russia, for sure. It is possible that the Mark III price tag will be put slightly higher than that of Nikon for marketing reasons (“more expensive means better”). Because there are no other reasons to turn up the price tag.
Probability : $ 3,500 - 40%, $ 3,000 - 40%, <$ 2,500 - 10%,> $ 4,000 - 10%
')
Specifications.
Full frame
Not even discussed. If only because the current semi-professional flagship 5D Mark II full-frame.
For reference. What is a full-frame (full-matrix) camera and what is its advantage over the “crooked” (literally - cropped) matrices? As the name implies, the physical size of the “full” matrix corresponds to the format of a film frame, approximately 36x24mm. The “crocs” of the matrix are smaller. Accordingly, with the same megapixels:
- The sprinkled matrices are more “noisy” due to the crowding and physically smaller dimensions of the sensors, as well as “better heat transfer” between them.
- more light falls on a full-size matrix, respectively, the “physical” photosensitivity is higher.
- in Crop, the real focal length of the optics should be multiplied by the Crop factor. That is, with a sprinkled camera, it is necessary to run off about one and a half times further to get the tighter size in the picture
Because of this, owners of full-matrix cameras can “save” on optics. More effectively using expensive light-sensitive lenses. Plus save on short-focus wide-angle lenses.
The most technologically “simple” and accordingly “cheap” focal length is 50-55mm. With distance from the optimum price (as well as weight and size) optics greatly increase, especially with high sensitivity. Moreover, prices are rising in the “short” direction than in the “long”, and the size and weight vice versa. Owners of the Crop are left to be comforted that their telephones are more long-range for the same price. I note that lighter and cheaper optics are made specifically for reduced matrixes, which ... can be successfully put on modern full-frame cameras. Alas, with the loss of full-frame.
Probability : 99% of the camera will be full-frame (1% that Canon will close the full-matrix semi-professional line, focusing on the still-current Mark II).
Own sensor
Nikon's flagship Kropov D7000 matrix is ​​Sony. The same that is put on the Sony Nex 5. And although Nikon podshamanil something and optics for DSLRs are much sharper than for system cameras, still some soaping and moire of the matrix sometimes get out on fine details. The truth is much less than the Nex-s. Who made the optics for the new D4 and D800 has not been announced. But conspiracy therapists are delighted.
It is clear that "your" sensor leaves more possibilities. Reasons to put someone else's sensor (or announce it), there is no Canon.
Probability : 90% own sensor
More megapixels
Until now, the Canonists with the 5D Mark II and 21Mp, looked patronizingly at the Nikon D700 with a miserable dozen of Mn. In the new chamber, Nikon charged three dozen - 36Mp. Almost like a medium format camera.
How many megapixels will Mark III have? Actually I think that 25-32. A person who buys a camera for $ 3,000 either understands that the full matrix is ​​more important than a formal resolution, or buys a “status thing” (and relies more on the name of the camera, rather than on characteristics).
And 36 MP is already the ultimate resolution. Because rests on the possibility of optics. Let's count. Optics resolution is calculated in lines per millimeter. Nikon has 7360 points on a 35.9mm matrix, which is a little more than 200 points, that is, 200 lines per mm.
If we consider the Bayer filter, it is necessary to divide the number of lines by another two. At least the root of the two, at most two. But still, in the end, we get 100 lines.
Minimum. At least 100 lines, really more.
Believe, there are not many lenses that give such a resolution under the “ small format ”. There is even a suspicion that having released a camera with such permission, Nikon was going to buy Leica or Zeiss. That can not but rejoice, because German optics with Japanese autofocus will appear. Or Lake was going to buy Nikon, which can not please, because then Nikon's cameras will cost as Leykovskie.
Therefore, there is not much point in 37, 38 and especially in 40Mp. But who knows - marketers rule in this world.
Probability : 20% that the camera will be 36+ Mp.
Frames per second
The D800 has a relatively low rate of fire - only 4 frames per second (6 when using the battery pack). The reverse side of high resolution.
Make Mark III more nimble, at least up to 5 shots per second (20% "faster") is not such a difficult task. Perhaps this is the “cheapest” solution in “marketing” excellence. Especially if Canon doesn’t pull megapixels up to heaven.
Probability : 80%, which will be more than 4 shots per second
ISO (light sensitivity)
Maximum ISO sick for Canon theme. In low-light conditions, Nikon has been out of competition for several years. But there is an ISO, which is written in the annotation and there is an ISO, which is really working. Therefore, most likely, the necessary digits will be written on the Mark III box. What is the "working" ISO that the D800, that the 5D, will show the tests after the cameras.
ISO Min. Here you can do (and you can pretend) that the matrix works at 50 ISO. This is unlikely to give better pictures, but will allow you to work on an open aperture with an excess of light.
For reference: when you increase the ISO matrix begins to more aggressively catch photons. Naturally, this increases the likelihood of false alarms of the sensors and auto-sensing of the sensors (from heating the matrix). What translates into a “noise” that is well known to any photographer. For the same reason, it is considered. that the most high-quality photos are obtained at low ISO. But there are technological thresholds and if the matrix does not make noise at 100 ISO, then it will not make noise on 50 units. And in this case, lowering the ISO image quality will not improve. The D800 is exactly what happens. The minimum ISO is 100, but you can set 50.
Probability : 90% that the maximum ISO will be declared no lower than that of the D800. 20%, which will be the minimum working ISO <100. 60% that will be the minimum declarative ISO 50
Dynamic range
It would be nice. Nikon has a dynamic range declared in 20Ev (as a measurement range, really less, judging by its D7000). Increasing DD is not easy, but if I succeed, I personally will strongly think whether I am such a stubborn Nikonian as a matter of fact.
For reference. Dynamic range is the difference between the darkest and the lightest clearly visible parts of the image. A typical example is a photograph against a window or sky on a bright day. Either the background is clogged with “milk”, or the details of “no background” become dark, sometimes to indistinguishability.
Probability : 25% that the DD Mark III will be wider than the D800
Ergonomics
It’s time to change the shape of the case a bit (at least, the grip) and the location of the camera power button, so that the camera can be turned on without looking like a Nikon. I see no reason not to do this in 5D Mark III. All the same, when you are doing well (with ergonomics), while the main “enemy” is fine, it’s somehow uncompetitive.
Probability : 30% for changing ergonomics (70% because the Canon hasn't been soaring for several decades, but can it be time?)
Soft
Canon is traditionally free to distribute software for computer camera control (unlike Nikon, who wants a decent program for decent money). Probably, something will appear in the box for organizing and pre-processing photos more convenient than that of a competitor. In the end, selling a camera for 3000 green can be added to the box and licensed to Silkypix or even Lightroom.
Probability : 80%, which will be more high-quality and diverse software
Video shooting
This is a sore subject for me, so I’ll immediately say that Canon had, is and will have an advantage due to two things. First: a smaller working segment and a larger bayonet diameter. Because of what, you can put a greater amount of optics from third-party manufacturers on Canon, incl. the same Nikon. Second: extensive experience in the production of video cameras, moreover, of very high quality for various market segments. What else?
Autofocus for video
It is time. Sane tracking autofocus, I have seen so far only in Sony (well, relatively sane and the one on the mirrorless). What is not surprising - the SLR is not a video camera and optics is completely different. My D7000 autofocus is ... fun and independent. But sometimes it helps when laziness overcomes. In the D800, I doubt that autofocus will be much better. The third brand, respectively, too. But suddenly? It's time.
Probability : 90% autofocus in liveview
More resolution and frame rate?
Nikon, finally, produces a camera for shooting in FullHD with 30 frames in progressive scan, and then already tired of falling into the "flicker" of 50 hertz lamps with 25 frames. And 60 frames in HD, which is also very good, better fast motion is “caught”.
What can Canon answer? Actually nothing. Such modes for him have already passed stage, but ... More resolution and a higher frame rate are needed by “filmmakers”, who are not so many in the total mass of buyers. And for professional video, let's say FullHD weddings - more than enough. Why are movies with a resolution of 3K or 4K , if they cannot be watched at home - there are no such monitors and televisions. And if they were, it would be hard to notice the difference with the naked eye.
Plus, greater resolution is competition with ourselves. Canon recently released a digital movie camera . Which, by the way, also rests on FullHD. Who will buy it for $ 15,000, when you can buy a fotik for $ 3,000 - $ 4,000. Perhaps the appearance of 2K video, which is slightly larger than FullHD, but can be announced a breakthrough.
Most of the frequency - cool, nothing more. Rather, the marketing feature for "slow motion" than the sought-after thing. You can do HD with 120 frames, everything else from the realm of science fiction.
Probabilities (cross) : HD x 120 - 20%, 2K - 15%, 3K - 10%, 4K - 5%
Algorithms Compression
Also from the realm of science fiction, the dream of “filmmakers” about an uncompressed video. It is easy to calculate that uncompressed FullHD at 25 frames per second will produce a stream of approximately 200 MB per second (with 4 byte encoding). A 64GB flash drive will be clogged with three minutes of material, only ... this is where to get a flash drive holding such a stream and not trying to melt. However, external access to the Raid array is possible.
Upd: As indicated in the comments, I forgot about USB 3.0 (which by the way is present in the D800). If Canon realizes the output of an uncompressed stream via USB 3.0, then the “filmmakers” will forgive him for almost anything.
Upd: Again, from the comments - 1 Gigabit network interface is possible. Unfortunately, it will not close the uncompressed video stream even with three-byte encoding. Again, a camera with a network interface in a semi-professional niche ...
For reference: uncompressed video allows for more "sweeping" color correction, or other post-processing, which is influenced by coding artifacts.
A new codec or upgrade of the old is also quite possible.
Probabilities (cross) : uncompressed - 20%, new codec - 25%, TCP / IP 1GB - 5%
Special effects "on the carcass"
Canon like in such a disgrace was not noticed. For which he respects, but again, marketing, and suddenly someone wants 3D transitions between the movie clips directly on the camera.
Probability : 10% (and good)
Bug work
Autofocus misses
Headache owners Mark II. The frame was caught, the lens turned, the confirmation squeaked, you look - everything is clear. You finish the descent. Cotton mirror. Opachki, and the focus has gone somewhere. Not that often, but there are five percent of such marriages for “pennies”. About the usual blunders when shooting "power" can not mention. As a result, the permanent shamanism with the settings.
If the problem is corrected in Mark III, then sales are guaranteed. At least at the expense of the owners of "two". I think, in Canon, they understand this very well, therefore we are waiting.
Upd: It’s very likely that the Mark III will receive 61 point autofocus systems (the D800 already has 51 points). However, besides the number of points, there is also a parameter “of them cruciform”, which Nikon has historically more. Therefore, it is impossible to say how it all works before the tests. So far, the fact that the Nikon D700 fewer misses than the Canon 5D Mark II.
Upd: It will be interesting if Canon remembers the “eye” focusing system when the camera follows the direction of the photographer’s gaze (especially if the photographer, like me, is wearing glasses at -7). Rather, it will be an advertising move, since the usual “cyclic” focusing allows you to quickly tell the camera what to focus on, but you want to dream. Especially such a function will be required for reporting, where it will allow you to quickly compose a frame, and not act according to the principle “focus is always centered, then cropped in FSH”.
Probabilities (cross) : 70%, that the Mark III will be less “miss the mark”, 10% that there will be a choice of the focus point by the “eye”
Battery charge
Nikon owners have a problem with charging batteries - remember where the "charging" is lying. Canon has no such problem. It's a pity. 4-6 hours of active work is very little.
Probability : 30% that Mark III batteries will be more capacious
Upd: What I forgot, but I was reminded
I forgot the multipoint foxy system, eye focusing, GPS, USB 3.0. Something is corrected in the updates above, which "did not fit" below.
GPS
In the D800, as always, the GPS receiver was not turned on. Of course there is the opportunity to buy cheap and connect external, but I want everything at once. The presence of GPS out of the box will please the canonists. And the Nikonists will have to say that the camera is not a mobile phone where they can push as much as possible.
The presence of such an installation reduces the degree of elitism, but is incredibly convenient.
Probability: Built-in GPS: 20%
Flash
Nikon “returned” to the D800 a fire-igniting built-in flash (taken from the 700), which should surely please the “stroboscopists”. The answer must be adequate. We are waiting for the flash system management function for the Mark III.
Probability: 80% Mark III will get a flash control system
Epilogue
Here is a prediction. Let's see what we managed to guess. And although my decision to buy a D800 may not be affected by many factors (dynamic range, cinema resolution), I still look forward to the announcement of the Mark III.
Let there be a struggle ...
Upd : according to rumors from the canonrumors Mark III announcement, will be held on February 28 .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/138126/
All Articles