… and I haven’t even gotten it yet. I’ve placed an order with Adorama for a Canon EOS 5D Mark III and expect to have the new full-frame body in about three weeks. I was never in love with my 5D Mark II, which was subject to massive autoexposure errors in contrasty outdoor scenes (i.e., the very conditions in which most families would be taking photos) and whose autofocus system was at best fair. From what I’ve read about the 5D Mark III I’m already a bit disappointed. Despite having a massive battery and enormous processing power, the camera lacks an 802.11 modem. A $49 Android phone can trickle JPEGs up to Google+ for sharing with friends, etc.; why can’t a $3500 camera? I’m sure the image quality will be higher than from a camera phone, but the workflow for simple photography tasks will be vastly worse.
I will try to write more after I receive the camera from Adorama.
I’m surprised to see this kind of post from you. It’s not like asking why your expensive sports car doesn’t have cup holders, but rather, more along the lines of asking why your massive 50-ton gravel-pit dumptruck doesn’t have turn-by-turn highway navigation. Sure, no one discounts that it would be useful in some situations, but it’s not exactly central to its core use.
Adding a cell-phone transceiver and accompanying monthly service plan like your $49 phone would probably detract from the camera for more of its intended audience than it would be additive. A simple wifi transceiver would probably detract less in terms of bulk, weight, and cost, but still detract more than not.
And then there’s the whole kettle of fish brought about by something that transmits on public frequencies, turning a simple one-unit-all-countries product into something that has to be built and certified separately for various countries or blocks of countries.
These are not insurmountable issues, but at this point it doesn’t seem like a “geez, what are they thinking?” kind of thing.
The 5D Mark III can of course do Wi-Fi… if you purchase the separate WFT-E7 unit. Adorama lists this for $850 – a bargain, I’m sure you’ll agree. Oh, and it sits in place of the vertical grip, only without any of the ergonomics or the vertical shutter.
And don’t forget the equally elegant, unobtrusive solution which you’ll also require if you wish to GPS-tag your images: the Canon GP-E2 GPS Receiver. This either blocks your hotshoe, needs a mounting bracket and cable, or alternatively (when pocketed and used as a ‘logger’) requires post-processing software to estimate your position when each shot was taken. Oh, and it requires its own battery and will set you back another $300.
I wish I could write something more positive here, but can instead only agree with you that the fact these features aren’t built into modern SLRs yet is very disappointing.
Can’t you fit a EyeFi in there?
Colin: I don’t think EyeFi will solve my problem. I probably don’t want the max resolution photos streamed up to Google+ and certainly not the RAWs. Probably something like a JPEG with a maximum dimension of 2000 pixels. Only the camera can generate this JPEG. I also want to control the behavior from the back of the camera. I don’t want to learn how to use some product other than the Canon, whose interface is already enough of a chore to learn.
I tend to travel w/ a lot of stuff, including my iPad. This card reader works with the camera connection kit and the iPad 2 http://www.amazon.com/Kodak-A250-Card-Reader-83037/dp/B002P5KOXG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1331595405&sr=8-1) It’s not supported, but as long as it works, I don’t really care.
All Phil is asking is for the 802.11 modem that comes with every $50 USB Wifi dongle and discounted cell phone. It’s a lousy chip, a tiny radio and an antenna, I have seen models on Amazon for $13 that are just a tiny bump on top of a USB plug. There is no excuse for a $3500 camera that is aimed at professionals to lack the ability to tether it to a laptop via WiFi so shots can be reviewed as soon as they are shot.
Except that this is just a ploy to sell you the WFT-E7.
As for the GPS receiver, it is simply idiotic of them to charge so much for it when point and shoot cameras like my Sony DSC-HX9V (< $300) and my DSC-HX100V ($400) have built-in GPS receivers.
If a camera was going to support web service uploads, I think Facebook and Flickr would have a much higher priority that Google+ which is only used by males who work in the technology sector. Personally, I think a prosumer camera shouldn’t even bother with uploads. Most people are going to want to do post-processing before publishing.
I don’t own the 5D Mark II and haven’t ordered the III. But if I were disappointed in the II and not happy with the specs of the III I think I would cancel the order. What makes you want to part with $3500?
This is a camera I am tempted to buy myself. For me the temptation is low noise even at high ISO. From what I have seen the III delivers in this regard remarkably well. Is this something you value?
@Stef at this point isn’t cheaper AND more convenient to buy a tablet with CF slot and move the pictures wherever you want throught it?
Eye-Fi will do that.
The Pro X2 will use WPS geotagging – not so good in the woods, but find in urban environments.
After initial configuration the card is operated using the camera’s interface (or at least that’s how the Olympus works). Remains to be seen what support Canon have added – if any.
Not everyone’s cup of tea and YMMV but a boatload less expensive than Canon’s native solution.
Cam: Eye-Fi can be configured to create a JPEG size that is not going to be stored permanently on the card and then upload JPEGs of that size to Google+ or a shared folder on a PC or home server?
Tekumse: Cheaper and more convenient to buy a second device that needs to be charged every night?
David: Why buy a Mark III if I didn’t like the Mark II? Your question would make sense to me if I were a user of a Canon EOS body. However, I am in fact a user of a Canon EOS system.
Alex: I don’t think it matters who the other users of Google+ are since it is possible to make a photo public via that service. It would be useful for photo and video sharing even if I were the only user on the planet (assuming that everyone else had at least a conventional Web browser). I’m not trying to find a date on Google+; I’m trying to get my photos into a place where they can be seen by a cousin, for example.
Don’t worry, all of this will be moot in a year or two when Lytro takes over the entire market and Nikon and Canon go the way of Polaroid.
– mark iii has two card slots for saving files in different formats/resolutions. my guess is that you can stick eyefi into one of them and still have an option for storing raw/hi res images to a flash card
– what is so urgent about your photographs that they require instant sharing 😉
– i do agree they should have done built in geo tagging. no excuse there
When will mid range and high end cameras start supporting WiFi interfaces that will allow all camera functions to be controlled remotely?
Then you could use an app on an smart phone, tablet, or laptop to remotely preview images, take photos or video, save pictures, upload, whatever you could imagine.
Maybe even support multiple cameras for video conferencing. Any digital camera could also be a web cam…
Just thinking.
A dSLR is not a snapshot camera. It’s a camera with workflow. That workflow is: take photos, edit photos (even if that means saying “oh, these are all awesome”), share photos. What’s next, asking why a pouch of D-76 doesn’t scan and upload photos to flickr?
I can’t say the lack of network connectivity bothers me, but what about the autoexposure problems? Any idea if Nikon is better on this front?
I’m still using an ancient Canon 5D (Mark I), and I preferred the overall look and feel of my pictures on Fuji NPH-400 film… though the digital format is vastly more convenient.
The autofocus is so bad on mine that I thought it was broken for a while, but eveyrone has the same problem. Canon screwed us and put a basic autofocus on the camera, it’s just that simple. I’m still mad. Mostly, I use Live View and focus myself (with the manify tool) when I can. It takes great pictures, though. I mostly keep it on M and you can see overexposure/underexposure through Live View and dial in a fix and tweak it afterwards.
Consider the D800? Now that camera looks just amazing. If I only had a $10,000 budget to replace my Canon lenses.
You’re a victim of market segmentation.
A JPG from a 5DMIII is, what, 5MB? I doubt Google+ is eager to accept 5MB JPGs from every person who buys a 5DIII.
Yes, the 5D can downsample the JPG, but why? It’s a $3,000 camera. People who buy $3K cameras are either a) professionals who can’t swing the Hasselblad or, b) rich assholes who need to have the best camera at the school play. A isn’t looking for Google+ integration, and B accounts for, what, 5% of the market?
The larger crime is that the Canon 5DIII has a learning disabled autofocus. My guess is that is because either a) the 5DIII is targeted to rich assholes at school plays, who wouldn’t notice a retarded autofocus, or b) the 5DIII caters to professionals with thin wallets who never use autofocus.
“Cam: Eye-Fi can be configured to create a JPEG size that is not going to be stored permanently on the card and then upload JPEGs of that size to Google+ or a shared folder on a PC or home server?”
JPEG size – yes.
Not stored permanently – depends whether you enable endless storage.
Google+ – yes, via Picasa
Home server – FTP is supported.
If you’re not near Wifi you can configure the card to send to your iPhone or Android phone and upload from there via 3G or EDGE.
PhilG – have enjoyed your web contributions for years. thanks.
I don’t think you can get all the way there (particularly the sizing issue) – but as one of the other posters pointed out the Mark iii does have two memory card slots – one configuration could be JPG to one card and Raw to the other. If the JPG card could be (not sure) an Eye-Fi card – it appears to be smart enough to upload/delete from the card to a variety of destinations including Picasa – I think Picasa and G+ albums can be crossed-linked. Not sure if you can set a default size on the Picasa end for uploads – but maybe.
Another thought is to watch the Channels available on something like ifttt.com – which is supposed to have G+ support soon. Maybe some scripted workflow could be possible from there.
I have the original 5D. I love the quality of the picture, but soon became quite frustrated with the AF. I had a my 24-70 2.8 and the 5d calibrated at canon’s service center, but it did not help.
I bright light or broad day light, it focuses well, but anything less and the camera is highly in accurate. I thought all my lenses were soft but had to keep reminding myself of pictures taken in daylight.
I did not buy the Mark II because I was really disappointed, with Canon’s decision to keep the AF from the 5D. I think they did not want the Mark II to scavenge sales of their 1 D line which the original 5D did.
I have pre-ordered the Mark III, because it is the upgrade that I was looking for (AF, newer sensor technology, etc). But canon still found a way to hobble this camera (22 MP instead of 16 -18 MP, slightly degraded AF and metering compared to the 1D, not having better weather sealing like the 1D, etc.). Come on, how much can a couple of additional rubber gaskets cost? if you are using the same AF module as the 1DX why not use the same metering? Why no uncompressed video through the HDMI port. Does not make sense considering the $1000 price increase, which could cover this.
Due to the popularity of the Mark II with videographers, they knew that they could get away with the $1000 increase compared to pro video cameras. But this does not fly with photographers, that’s why they kept the Mark II and lowered the price.
Nikon does not seem to subscribe to this philosophy though. But since I have been using canon cameras for the last 20+ years, I will have to take this on the chin.
Philip.. apparently you have forgotten your own rants about the cost of simple features that are sold as add-ons by the Camera makers. Like you, I too used the Rollei 6×6 system once and I still remember paying more than the latest ipad for an IR remote. I am sure they will come up with a $700 wifi transceiver soon… wait, they will probably make you upgrade to the Mark IV body first.
Nikon.