Eos 1Ds Mk III vs Eos 5d MkII

[mommix]

<p>Hello Everyone, I own an EOS 5d Mk II, and before that I had a 5d, now I have the opportunity to sell my 5d mk II and get a 1Ds mk III, obviously putting some money on the desk...<br>

My question is: is it really an upgrade (and a big one given the price diff) or not? and is it worth it?<br>

For ex the 1ds uses 2 digic 3 while the 5d had the digic 4 that it's seems to be better with high ISO.<br>

I'm stuck...<br>

I most of all shot landscapes and eventually portraits, as you can see in my portfolio.<br>

Thanks every1 for your help<br>

Maury</p>

 

[Brad_]

If you're doing landscapes and eventually portraits, I don't think you can do any better than the 5DII. And

you already have the cam...

[KenPapai]

<p>The DIGIC III processor already *almost* 2 gens old.</p>

<p>Do you really have to have a pro built camera? Otherwise the 5D2 wins here. Regardless, I doubt you can go wrong and I am guessing a 1Ds3 costs more than the 5D2.</p>

 

[ken schwarz]

<p>I use the 5D2 and found that I really like shooting with the battery grip because it makes it easier to shoot portraits and it accepts a hand strap. You can spend more money and get that same large size with the 1DsMk3, plus a slightly faster shutter, nicer viewfinder and better AF. I think it's a lot for an incremental improvement, and you'd lose video. Doesn't sound too appealing to me, but no question the 1D cameras are a pleasure.</p>

[markonestudios]

<p>I would stick with the 5D2 if I were you.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Maurizio,</p>

<p>It is a very personal question and one really only you could answer after using both cameras. I chose a 1DS MkIII instead of a 5D MkII. For me the price difference is worth it, for me the AF alone is worth the price. The difference in high iso is marginal, the 5D MkII goes higher in the menu (but you can do effective work arounds for the 1DS MkIII) but when well processed it is very difficult, if not impossible, to tell the two apart at the same iso, having said that in bad light the 1DS MkIII AF will work long after the 5D MkII has given up.</p>

<p>How is your 5D MkII letting you down or limiting you? If it isn't then the swap does not seem to make much sense. Save your money for the 5D MkIII, it should be released within the next 12 months, and that will be a good step over the IQ of the 1DS MkIII.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>As a 1 series user, I can tell you I'd pick the 1DS III hands down. However, if you've never used a 1 series and like the 5D II, then it's a tougher decision. The 5D II does have HD video. I just know that since I've had my 1D II, I will never have anything less than a 1 series. I know it sounds pretentious, but the 1 series is one of things that once you go, you never go back. But if you don't know what you're missing, then the 5D II should do more than a fine job. I know the one thing that is a huge difference between the two is autofocus, but Scott has a point with the 5D III, although we don't know when it is coming, hopefully it will have the new 7D AF system, which will bring it much closer to the standards of the 1D in that regard. </p>

[john_a5]

<p>Have both and I shoot mostly the 1dsIII, but I am not sure that in most cases it would make a difference in the images I make. I do think the 5dII has better high ISO performance, but shoot the ds at 1600 a lot and it works fine.</p>

<p>Would I upgrade to the 1dsIII if I had the 5dII, probably not at this point. Both cameras are "old" in their cycle and both should have upgrades soon. I don't think I could find a reason to upgrade anyway, for image quality purposes, but it is, as Nathan suggests, a pleasure to use the 1ds camera and as a pro, I appreciate some of the features it offers that the 5dII doesn't.</p>

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>My question is: is it really an upgrade (and a big one given the price diff) or not? and is it worth it?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If you have to ask, the answer is no. If you have already experienced a 1Ds III, then you would have made your decision without having to ask here.</p>

[gregcoad]

<p>Peter J said it all. And I will also echo what Nathan said above, once you have used a 1 series camera you never go back. I am just a poor hobbyist using a 1Ds mk I and I have no desire for the next great x0D or xD. I only dream about the next 1Ds that I will own. Here's hoping that the used mkIII's come down to the $2500 price point once the mkIV finally arrives (if it ever does).</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>I have owned and used both extensively. The advantage to the 1Ds3 is the build quality - that is the only reason why I would "upgrade." On the other hand, the 1Ds3 takes significantly longer to write to the flash card (slows one down); has an awful LCD compared to the 5D2 - and weighs a brick to carry around all day.</p>

<p>So if you need great weather sealing; and will be in compromised weather (cold, drizzle/humid such as Antarctica or the Pacific Coast) - and slightly better (faster but not more accurate) AF - go for the 1Ds3. Personally I would stay with the 5D2 - and I just sold my 1Ds3 to go back to the 5d2.</p>

[mommix]

I thank you all for your explanation, I think in the end I'll stick with my 5d. The only complain I have for the 5d and the

reason I'm thinking to upgrade is the AF, that isn't very accurate ,in my opinion, but I understand from your words that

the difference from 1ds isn't so big. Eventually I'll get a 1d mk iv or a 7d to use for action and birdwatching shots and

my 5d for landscapes.

Anyway I think that this is the right place to make questions about equipment and I don't think it's a reserved room for

1ds owners who never need to ask and others don't have the right to raise any doubt about the Canon queen and

even worst to compare it with other models ; but it's just a thought that crossed my mind and I don't want in any way

to be polemic.

Thank you all for sharing your experience with me, it's good to have friends helping you to make decisions.

 

Maury

[ant_nio_ferreira]

<p>Canon 5D mark II is better in high ISO than Ds mark3; it is much lighter; it shoots video; it is much cheaper. The AF is about the same in 99% of the situations. I would change if I had to shoot in very bad weather, or if I needed 100% viewfinder coverage. Sebastião Salgado had a Ds mark III and switched for a 5D mark II. Wait for the end of the year and get a Mark IV or a 5D mark III.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>I've never used a 5D, but I imagine it has a similar AF system to my old 40D. If this is the case, the 1D AF is a significant upgrade. The AF on the 40D was good, but I didn't know how good AF could be until I used my 1D II. I'm not trying to sell one camera or the other, but if AF is a priority then the 1 series may be something to look into. See if you can rent a 1DS for a day or two and then you'll know either, "I don't really need this," or "I absolutely have to have one." </p>

[zml]

<p>To the OP: some people wo have answered your question have never even seen a 1Ds3 up close and personal so RENT ONE and answer your own question. The differences between 5D2 and 1Ds3 are more than size/wieght/AF...Say, red channel tends to clip sooner on 5D2. Work out a viable comparison methodology (the nominal sensitivity of both sensors is slightly different), honestly compare the results and THEN decide.</p>

[pierrearnaud]

<p>@ Antonio Ferreira :<br>

I read all about Salgado's switch to the 1dsMIII, and the post-processing team employed to make his digital files consistent in rendition with the medium format films he started Genesis with. I'm surprised to read that he moved to a 5DII. Can you confirm the source of this information ? The reason I'm surprised is that changing cameras would probably entail redefining the post processing procedure first set up with the 1dsIII, something that required quite a bit of work, trial & error, etc. Given his type of work, I am wondering about the advantage/benefit of such a switch.</p>

<p>Anyway, I am myself considering the upgrade that the OP went through originally, that is from the 5D1 to either the 5Dii or its successor. My concern is how the lenses I own might fare on a more demanding sensor. Ideally, I would like to see Canon come up with a new full frame model with a 7D-ish improved autofocus and a pixel count smaller than the current 5DII, which would improve dynamic and high iso performance, while keeping file size within the reach of an aging computer. Unfortunately, this seems unlikely in Canon's ecosystem.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Pierre,</p>

<p>It depends on how long you are prepared to wait and if you think the 1D series will move over to FF from the 1.3 crop. Many expected the 1D MkIV to be a selectable ff and crop camera, like the Nikon D3s, a direct 1D MkIV competitor that has taken many Canon sales, and the 1D3x, a camera that really does embarrass the 1Ds MkIII in many respects.</p>

<p>I would expect the next 1D iteration to be selectable FF, 10fps, with no less than 18mp but probably 21mp.I think selectable crop factors will be retained for the pro series cameras from both manufacturers for the foreseeable future though.</p>

<p><em>"My concern is how the lenses I own might fare on a more demanding sensor"</em></p>

<p>They will look absolutely no worse for the same sized print, but in some situations could look much better.</p>

[pierrearnaud]

Scott,

 

Thanks for your knowledgeable answer. I am in no great hurry to upgrade. In fact, I like to limit upgrade cycles as

much as possible, as it always entails some amount of adjustments, tests and problem solving. As my time is limited,

I'd rather spend it more creatively. Also a majority of my work is silver based b&w, so that I can happily live with my

5d1 (no slouch quality wise) for some time.

 

I had never considered the 1D series because of the crop factor, but undoubtedly their feature set is what I am looking

for. If as you say this line is to move to FF, then it certainly makes sense for me to wait.

 

As for lens performance, I was mostly thinking about my 24/1.4 : high res sensors are said to be particularly tough on

wides, and since this lens has been upgraded, i'm a bit worried.

[scott_ferris]

<p>Pierre,</p>

<p>You are welcome, though I am not sure it is knowledgeable :-) I have a 1Ds MkIII, it is a superb camera, the only thing I could think that would dramatically improve it would be a big fps increase and a native crop capability, I used 1D cameras but found the lack of ultrawide angle lenses frustrating.</p>

<p>If the 1D MkV is a ff high resolution 10fps camera with crop function I will spend the $5,000+ on it, if it is a 1.3 crop only I won't.</p>

<p> </p>

[pierrearnaud]

<p>Scott,<br>

I'm with you : I would definitely consider the upcoming 1D if it's FF. I guess I should also consider a used 1DsIII as an upgrade possibility, as its fps rate is more than enough for my needs, and you mentioned its superior AF compared with the 5D. The file size though is a bit of a concern, as it exceeds my needs : I print maximum A3.</p>