5D vs 1D mkIII

[Lightworkz]

Intending to upgrade to a pro series DSLR end of the year and decided on the 5D. I checked the prices of both and find that price diff is not very much. Now I am fickle-minded, whether to get 5D or add $$$ or get 1D III upfront. I hope Canon would have addressed all the issues with the 1DIII by year end just before Xmas. Constructive comment wanted. Please keep thread within topic and refrain from off-tracking. Thank you.

[u2psb]

If I were you, I'll choose mkIII since I'm not quite interested in wide view, more in snap.
mkII allow you to take a shot which require higher speed due to its superb nosite resistance
and easy to catch speedy movement.
Most of all, u can be free from worrisome of dust on CCD.

But if U prefer to still shot or landscape, 5D will be the right choice.
No reason to lose 30% of your angle. U know the difference btn x 1.3 and 1.0 is huge at wide angle.
Hope you would enjoy your photo life.

[Lightworkz]

Originally Posted by u2psb If I were you, I'll choose mkIII since I'm not quite interested in wide view, more in snap. mkII allow you to take a shot which require higher speed due to its superb nosite resistance and easy to catch speedy movement. Most of all, u can be free from worrisome of dust on CCD. But if U prefer to still shot or landscape, 5D will be the right choice. No reason to lose 30% of your angle. U know the difference btn x 1.3 and 1.0 is huge at wide angle. Hope you would enjoy your photo life.

Yah, I was swayed to the 1DIII after I found out the price. 1.3 vs 1.0 is a third of the AOV, but 5D will exhibite slight vignetting when using 10-22mm lens or other ultra-wide WA lens, doesn't it? I don't mind the 1.3x focal length multipier on the 1DIII. But does the dust filter thingy really works?

[genegoh]

I guess it'll depend on what u like to shoot and what range u normally would use.

If u like shooting landscapes, get the 5D. If you don't need ultra-wide angles, then you can go for the 1D.
Even the 1.6x crop bodies will be wider than the 1D cos they can use the 10-22. For 1D, max would be 1.3x16mm=21mm

By the way, 10-22 cannot be used on the 5D nor the 1DmkIII.

[ST1100]

Originally Posted by Lightworkz I checked the prices of both and find that price diff is not very much.

Just curious, what were the prices you found? i was under the impression that mk3 was btw S$6k-7k while the 5D was around S$3.6-3.9k new.

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by ST1100 Just curious, what were the prices you found? i was under the impression that mk3 was btw S$6k-7k while the 5D was around S$3.6-3.9k new.

nola 5d still 4k+ for a local set, mk3 is 6-7k assuming you can find 1....

[icestrike]

e 2k difference can get a good L lens

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by Lightworkz Intending to upgrade to a pro series DSLR end of the year and decided on the 5D. I checked the prices of both and find that price diff is not very much. Now I am fickle-minded, whether to get 5D or add $$$ or get 1D III upfront. I hope Canon would have addressed all the issues with the 1DIII by year end just before Xmas. Constructive comment wanted. Please keep thread within topic and refrain from off-tracking. Thank you.

Get the markIII.... previously 5d's trump card was it's high iso performance now the mkIII surpasses that.... and there's always the sigma 12-24....

[Lightworkz]

Originally Posted by ST1100 ........ i was under the impression that mk3 was btw S$6k-7k while the 5D was around S$3.6-3.9k new.

RRP for 1DIII is $6999 (i think) and 5D is $42xx, all local set price. 5D with $3k+ one is grey set.

[Lightworkz]

Originally Posted by genegoh I guess it'll depend on what u like to shoot and what range u normally would use. If u like shooting landscapes, get the 5D. If you don't need ultra-wide angles, then you can go for the 1D. Even the 1.6x crop bodies will be wider than the 1D cos they can use the 10-22. For 1D, max would be 1.3x16mm=21mm By the way, 10-22 cannot be used on the 5D nor the 1DmkIII.

Opps my bad, I forgot 10-22mm is an EF-S, anyway I do not own this lens. Well, there aren't many ultra WA to choose from. For 1DIII, I can only get Sigma AF 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX HSM. Resulting FOA will be 15.6mm. Any other ultra WA lens that you can think of?

[Lightworkz]

Originally Posted by zj2000 Get the markIII.... previously 5d's trump card was it's high iso performance now the mkIII surpasses that.... and there's always the sigma 12-24....

Yah, most people will go for the 1DIII, but I am waiting for Canon to resolve all the outstanding issues and get these loose end tied up before I get my hand on one. Until now, I haven't hear of a compounding reason to get the 5D, hope someone will convince me otherwise. How much differnece do you get if you shoot portrait with 5D & 1DIII?

[lightning]

I believe the 1DIII is more towards sports. If you are not really taking sports and fast event, 5D will be alright. Specs and nich of each camera is different, but handling is also another. I use to shoot with 5D, but since I switch to the 1 series....there is not turining back. The feel of the camera is so nice!

[Lightworkz]

Originally Posted by lightning I believe the 1DIII is more towards sports. If you are not really taking sports and fast event, 5D will be alright. Specs and nich of each camera is different, but handling is also another. I use to shoot with 5D, but since I switch to the 1 series....there is not turining back. The feel of the camera is so nice!

You are tempting me, my friend!

[ST1100]

Originally Posted by Lightworkz Yah, most people will go for the 1DIII, but I am waiting for Canon to resolve all the outstanding issues and get these loose end tied up before I get my hand on one. Until now, I haven't hear of a compounding reason to get the 5D, hope someone will convince me otherwise. How much differnece do you get if you shoot portrait with 5D & 1DIII?

i can offer one reason to get the 5D: depreciation. The 1D, 1Dmk2, and 5D all started life in the 6-7k region, and rapid went down to 3-4k in about 2 years. You'd lose a lot less with a 5D, especially if you get a used one at a good price ($3.2k?). There's little or no chance of getting a used mk3 (at a 'used' price anyway) for a long while more, so you'd likely have to buy new if you want one anytime soon.

[miniUltraman]

I was considering 5D and IDMIII for a while. But decided on the 5D eventually. These are my considerations personally.
a) high iso handling. 5D can handle iso3200 very well while 1DMIII is capable of iso6400. I think iso3200 is pretty extreme already, iso6400 is good to have.
b) 10 fps vs 3 fps - 10 fps is good for sports. Then I realise I have not even really utilize 5fps on my previous 30D. I shoot mostly 1 shoot at a time and I love landscape and portrait more than sports
c) Anti-dust - While this is good, I heard reviews that 400D still face alot of dust issues. So the point is you still have to take extra care while changing lens. And learn how to clean the sensor yourself.
d) I like wide angle landscape or wide portrait esp shooting my kids (which include the landscape) during holidays. I get true 16mm on 16-35L while 1.3x can only use sigma 12-24 to realise that. I don't like 3rd party lens. This is my MAIN decision factor, actually.
e) Stock of 1DMIII still not readily available. 1st batch seems to suffer from QC problem.
f) I save about $2k which I can buy a 16-35MII

The only disadvantage is that my 200mm lens no longer appear to be a 200mm. I need at least 300mm That gives me a reason to get myself a 300mmf4L

[Lightworkz]

Originally Posted by ST1100 i can offer one reason to get the 5D: depreciation. The 1D, 1Dmk2, and 5D all started life in the 6-7k region, and rapid went down to 3-4k in about 2 years. You'd lose a lot less with a 5D, especially if you get a used one at a good price ($3.2k?). There's little or no chance of getting a used mk3 (at a 'used' price anyway) for a long while more, so you'd likely have to buy new if you want one anytime soon.

good point there. but the 5D will depreciate more than the 1DIII since it is more "common". I may consider the 5D if it is sub $3k for 2nd hand.

[Lightworkz]

finally from someone who is in the same shoes as me. do you like your 5D?

Originally Posted by miniUltraman I was considering 5D and IDMIII for a while. But decided on the 5D eventually. These are my considerations personally. a) high iso handling. 5D can handle iso3200 very well while 1DMIII is capable of iso6400. I think iso3200 is pretty extreme already, iso6400 is good to have. b) 10 fps vs 3 fps - 10 fps is good for sports. Then I realise I have not even really utilize 5fps on my previous 30D. I shoot mostly 1 shoot at a time and I love landscape and portrait more than sports c) Anti-dust - While this is good, I heard reviews that 400D still face alot of dust issues. So the point is you still have to take extra care while changing lens. And learn how to clean the sensor yourself. d) I like wide angle landscape or wide portrait esp shooting my kids (which include the landscape) during holidays. I get true 16mm on 16-35L while 1.3x can only use sigma 12-24 to realise that. I don't like 3rd party lens. This is my MAIN decision factor, actually. e) Stock of 1DMIII still not readily available. 1st batch seems to suffer from QC problem. f) I save about $2k which I can buy a 16-35MII The only disadvantage is that my 200mm lens no longer appear to be a 200mm. I need at least 300mm That gives me a reason to get myself a 300mmf4L

[vernonleow]

Originally Posted by miniUltraman d) I like wide angle landscape or wide portrait esp shooting my kids (which include the landscape) during holidays. I get true 16mm on 16-35L while 1.3x can only use sigma 12-24 to realise that. I don't like 3rd party lens. This is my MAIN decision factor, actually.

But the Sigma has better barrel distortion control than the 16-35L. I use both but for different purposes. For architecture and interior, I use the Sigma, when I do events and need the faster f stop, I use the Canon.

[phoakm]

Originally Posted by Lightworkz Intending to upgrade to a pro series DSLR end of the year and decided on the 5D. I checked the prices of both and find that price diff is not very much. Now I am fickle-minded, whether to get 5D or add $$$ or get 1D III upfront. I hope Canon would have addressed all the issues with the 1DIII by year end just before Xmas. Constructive comment wanted. Please keep thread within topic and refrain from off-tracking. Thank you.

Hi, 2 cents of advice. Try not to put $$$ as a barrier in buying things, but to ask yourself what you want to use it for. It will be easier in making decision on choosing the right stuff.

I always asked the same questions to all my friends. What are their shooting preferences? Is it justifiable?

I owned both of them and both have their pros and cons. When I bought 5D a year back (during that period owned a MKIIn), I told myself I need this cam for certain purpose and worth getting it with no hesitation. Now I used it with no regrets. Same thinking applied to MKIII.

Hope that this will help you. No offence, but to share some exprience.
PS: Do drop me a pm if you have some queries.
Cheers!

[Lightworkz]

wow! your input is invaluable to me, many thanks! But for me, I can only afford one of these at the moment so to me it is really a choice of one cam not BBB virus (buy both). haha. I do take sports event occasionally (like speedskating and cycling races) so I have kind of a "bao ka liao" genre. I have actually made up my mind on what to buy now, just waiting for Canon to address all the problem of the 1DIII, hopefully can get a "version 2" of the 1DIII by this December, if not have to wait till next year.

Originally Posted by phoakm ....... I owned both of them and both have their pros and cons. When I bought 5D a year back (during that period owned a MKIIn), I told myself I need this cam for certain purpose and worth getting it with no hesitation. Now I used it with no regrets. Same thinking applied to MKIII. Hope that this will help you. No offence, but to share some exprience. PS: Do drop me a pm if you have some queries. Cheers!