Upgrade from 5Dmk2, to 5Dmk3 or 1-D X? Portrait & fashion

<p>Need a bit of advice in choosing between the 5Dmk3 and the 1D-X for an upgrade - I've been shooting on the 5dmk-2 for 3 years, mainly with 85mm 1.2 L lens.. I shoot outside, in sometimes dubious weather conditions, but I've never had any issues with the 5Dmk2.. Only looking to upgrade as I'd rather put any available capital back into my business than give it to the tax man.. I've read various reviews and my main points of interest are (obviously) higher quality images, and the faster AF system (particularly relevant as 85mm 1.2 is quite a loose focussing lens on the mk2).. and possible noise reduction? I know the 1-dx is supposed to be good on the AF front, but was wondering if any portrait photographers who might have used both 5dmk2, 5dmk3 and 1d-x could offer me some advice as to which might be better for my kind of work? Is the 1d-x worth the extra cash?<br>

Many Thanks,<br>

Faye</p>

 

<p>I own a 1Dx but I have not shot with the 5D III yet outside testing in store. Canon is lending me one on 3/13 via CPS so I can do a thourough use test. While I love the 1Dx sometimes I want a lighter body when I don't need to shoot high FPS or require absolute weather sealing so I am considering adding a 5D III. Right now I shoot 1Dx with a 1D IV as backup so a lightweight body would be good for me.<br>

The question of the price being worth it for the 1Dx vs 5DIII comes down to these points to me, weighted for price difference:<br>

1> FPS, if you shoot any action, sports or wildlife 1Dx> 5DIII<br>

2> Weather Sealing, the 5D is weather sealed ( I but not to the same level as the 1dx) 5DIII >= 1DX (if you are going to be out in torrential rain or at the foot of waterfalls I would go 1Dx, a light shower 5D should be fine)<br>

3> IQ, 5DIII > 1DX (cost to 5DIII, thought the IQ on the 1Dx is basically the same to my eye)<br>

4> build quality, 1DX >= 5DIII (but do you need a armored truck or will a f-150 do you okay)<br>

5> AF, 1Dx > 5dIII the AF speed/accuracy on the 1Dx is second to none in my opinon (this may change with more testing on the 5DIII, if it's close the cost difference may tip it to 5DIII)<br>

6> low light, 5DIII=1DX the 1dx has a slight edge in low light AF the 5D a slight edge in low light IQ (from what I read)</p>

 

<p>Thanks Mark, really helpful response. I shoot for about 5 hours a day, without a tripod, camera on portrait.. so if the 1d-X is substantially heavier than the 5d-2 that might be an issue as I already have a bit of shoulder trouble<br>

1. Don't shoot action, sports, or wildlife.. need fast and sharp focus, but I never shoot on burst.<br>

2. Does anyone know if the 5D3 is more or less weather sealed than the 5D2? - I've shot in pouring rain before without an issue, but if it's less, that might be a problem.<br>

3. Sounds good..<br>

4. Something to withstand the occasional knock.. once dropped my 5D2 onto a wooden floor, but it survived fine.. just to that standard...?<br>

5. ..ok, needs investigating..<br>

6.. shall also investigate.. </p>

<p>5d 3: £2,335.00<br>

1d-x: £4,849.00<br>

... for the extra £2.5K I could get a new computer & lens.. hmmm... <br>

Thanks very much Mark.. I think I shall go annoy the guys in Calumet for a few hours. If anyone has any more input, it'd be much appreciated.. <br>

ps: Does anyone know if canon are planning to release any more interesting models this year?</p>

 

<p>The 1Dx is specifically aimed at sports shooters. The only real advantage the 5D III has over the 5D II is the AF you refer to, but if what you have is working I'm not sure this is a big difference.</p>

<p>Yeah, I'd be considering lenses and computers.</p>

<p>The main advantages of the 1DX over the 5DIII are the integrated vertical grip, better high ISO performance (although the 5DIII is very good in this regard), and extremely fast frames per second shutter performance. If you plan to shoot at blisteringly fast FPS, the 1DX has no peer (except the 1DC, but that's a different technology altogether).</p>

<p>The advantages of the 5DIII over the II are sharper image quality (which some folks will dispute, but I see it clearly), world class autofocus, better high ISO performance, significantly better weather sealing, a substantially more rugged body, better Live View functionality supported by an absolute gem of an LCD screen, and integrated HDR, pus a number of video improvements that you may or may not find useful. And it's half the price of a 1DX.</p>

<p>Full disclosure: I own a 5DII, a 5DIII, as well as cameras from the N company. I have not used a 1DX.</p>

<p>Full disclosure: . . .'the N company'<br>

:)</p>

<p>For "higher image quality" you should be buying the Hasselblad H4D-40 Medium Format DSLR Camera with 80mm f/2.8 HC Lens. Sounds like you are ready to advance to the next format level.</p>

<p>Have you considered the 6D?</p>

<p>Never shooting sports, and not going to be in the weather or beating the hell out of it then the 5D III will probably be a better choice. And like you say the weight can become an issue over the course of a day of shooting the 1dx is almost double the weight of the 5DIII. You can have extra money for lenses/computers which will likely be more value for your situation.<br>

Ed mentioned the 6D, from what i have read and seen in reviews I would stay far away. the AF system has only 9 points and only 1 cross type (center point) and even using the center point people have complained about inaccurate focus.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>...and even using the center point people have complained about inaccurate focus. [Mark Palmquist]</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They are <strong>probably</strong> full of it. There is nothing wrong with the centre autofocus point with my 6D.</p>

<p>As I understand it the AF on the 6D is at least as good as that on the 5D Mark II, so it would still be an upgrade. The original poster did mention noise reduction as a criterion, and the 6D is better at that than either of the two older full-frame bodies.</p>

<p>Would love to get a hasselblad - but current budget won't quite stretch to the £13700 it's on for.. ;) ..perhaps next year.. Not considered the 6D, but I'll certainly have a play with it... if it's reasonably comparable to the 5D3 I'd definitely choose 5D3 as it'll eat the same batteries as 5d2.. Noise isn't a massive issue.. but I do shoot outdoors in late afternoon semi-twilight sometimes.. normally only go up to a max of iso800 on the 5D2.. shooting around 2.8 on the 85mm 1.2.. apparently the weather sealing on the 5D3 is better than that of the 5D2 - can anyone verify that? I do sometimes shoot in the pouring rain, as I said - don't shoot in waterfalls, and never had any issues with 5D2 in the rain, so it's very important that an upgrade can withstand british weather conditions..<br>

Sharp iq is really important - I shoot portraits, sometimes on a very shallow dof, and the number of slightly off focus shots with the 85mm 1.2 can be rather irritating.. if an upgrade reduces that substantially, it'd be worth it for me.. </p>

<p>The 1D X would be ideal for the British rain. The weather sealing has been improved on the 5D3. I wouldn't risk testing mine in the British rain. It rained every day when I visited last July. My 85/1.2 II has no issues focusing with either my 6D and 5D III. But, staying still is the key when using f/1.2.</p>

<p>Given the cost of the 1D X you could buy two 5D3s, or three 6Ds, and if you damage one in the rain you have a spare, and still a bit of cash left over.</p>

<p>I didn't want to contribute as I couldn't find where I've read it. I read in several places the autofocus system on Canons can't autofocus tighter than F2.8 which can show as the autofocus being loose with faster lenses particularly F1.2 lenses. You're wondering if it will be tighter on a newer camera and I think the answer is going to be no, the autofocus is only good down to F2.8.</p>

<p>I didn't want to contribute as I couldn't find where I've read it. I read in several places the autofocus system on Canons can't autofocus tighter than F2.8 which can show as the autofocus being loose with faster lenses particularly F1.2 lenses. You're wondering if it will be tighter on a newer camera and I think the answer is going to be no, the autofocus is only good down to F2.8.</p>

<p>The 5D MkIII will AF at f/5.6 right now and an firmware update is promised by April that will improve that to f/8.</p>

<p>Besides FPS, the 1DX has higher voltage and will manhandle the AF of Canon's big lenses better than the 5D MkIII. If you were ever to use a super-tele, then that would be important, but I don't think you'll need it for studio work.</p>

<p>Weather sealing on the MkII and MkIII are similar. From what I've read, the 6D is a step down in that regard, about in line with the xxD models.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the input - very helpful. Went into calumet to play with the 1d-x and 5d3 (left the 6d as I agree, it's not really appropriate as an upgrade to 5d2)..</p>

<p>Impressions - both beautiful machines, AF is gorgeous on both.. obviously the layout on the 5D3 is very familiar for 5d2 users.. One extra thing that I particularly love (other than the better high ISO quality - portraits on 1600 looked gorgeous in the shop, when I hate going above 800 on the mk2) is the rate button on the 5d3.. might seem like a small thing, but I shoot maybe 700-1200 shots a session on a portrait/fashion shoot, so the ability to rate as you review on-camera is potentially going to save me quite a bit of time in the edit, as I'm guessing canon's digital photo professional software will read the rating and you can easily do an initial edit, (going to double check this).. I'm really excited about that! That's a big plus for me, personally. </p>

<p>I'd loved the quality of photos on the 1d-x and it is a beautiful machine, but for me as a small female (5'2") the 1d-x is substantially heavier than the 5D3, particularly with the 85 1.2 which is already a moderately heavy lens.. to use that for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week without a tripod is going to destroy my back.. that's a serious downside.. and from what I've gathered here and in store, the features are great if you're sports or wildlife, but for portraiture the 5D3 is almost equivalent for most usage.. I gather the weather proofing is marginally improved from the 5d2 but couldn't find any tests on this.. so, I've decided to get the 5d3 plus the 50mm 1.2L lens which I've wanted for a while, and enough cash left over to put towards a new workhorse computer! :) Hooray! </p>

<p>Hope this thread is of use for any other portrait photographers currently on the 5d2.. and much thanks for all the advice.</p>

<p>I think that was a wise move to go for the 5DmkIII. I just had to look at the specs of the 5DmkIII and what I was saying about autofocus accuracy was correct. The autofocus system is F2.8 - F5.6 (F8 with firmware) which means if you're shooting at F1.2 the autofocus system will only be as accurate as F2.8 so I would suspect some slight variation even with a Mark III between what you focused on and what's in focus shooting at F1.2.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you are primary shooting portrait and fashion I don't think you will tell a differwence between 5DII and 5DIII. Better lenes ie Canon 24-70 F2.8II and Canon 70-200 F2.8 II or adding\ upgrading studio strobes would make more of a difference than upgrading camera body. In studio I am shooting at F8 center , focus, at a fairly static object 10 feet away. Don't need much in terms of autofocus precesion with bright modeling lights in studio or on runways.</p>

<p>"The autofocus system is F2.8 - F5.6" Out of interest where in the specs do you see that? I am wondering whether this f/2.8 "precision" of the autofocus system is the same in other Canon bodies.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> just had to look at the specs of the 5DmkIII and what I was saying about autofocus accuracy was correct. The autofocus system is F2.8 - F5.6 (F8 with firmware) which means if you're shooting at F1.2 the autofocus system will only be as accurate as F2.8</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, it's not correct.<br>

<br />You said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I read in several places the autofocus system on Canons can't autofocus tighter than F2.8 which can show as the autofocus being loose with faster lenses particularly F1.2 lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> Which clearly suggests that the camera will perform <em>less well</em> with an f/1.2 lens than it would with an f/2.8 lens.<br>

<br />In fact, the <em>high precision</em> (there's a hint about their effectiveness in the name) f/2.8 sensors will work - properly and effectively - with any lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 <em>or better</em>. So an f/1.2 lens will (other things being equal) be <em>every last bit as good in AF terms</em> as an f/2.8 lens.</p>

<p>I routinely use my cheap and cheerful Plastic Fantastic 50mm f/1.8 wide open on my 7D (high precision f/2.8 sensor active) and it's excellent at f/1.8 - tiny DoF and inherent AF quirks of the lens itself, notwithstanding.<br>

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx</p>

<p>I know I will be stoned here in this forum for what I will say next. IMOP, anyone who is using autofocus with a lens aperture of F1.2 is most likely not going to get very many good shots.<br>

I shot with the Canon 85 1.2L and I can tell you this lens does not autofocus well at all. Yes, it will autofocus on something at F1.2 and will autofocus on items well in very low light. <br>

The problem is it will not automatically focus on what you expect it to. With this lens I can focus on your right eye and your left eye can be out of focus. To get good shots at F1.2 I generally first need a tripod. Second I need a static object. Third I have to use my eye not autofocus. Liveview with 100% zoom is great for low light focusing at F1.2.<br>

But yes, in theory a F2.8 or faster lens will autofocus better in low light than a slower lens. </p>