- Welcome to Aviation Photographers of Southern Ca..
Posted by Midnight Mover
- June 09, 2010, 10:28:32 PMEOS 1D Mark IV is only $4,999.95 at B&H 
But yes, I could not afford it either
so 1/2 price is not so bad 
But yes, I could not afford it either
so 1/2 price is not so bad Posted by Dragonskiss
- June 09, 2010, 08:20:29 PMSince two of my friends use the 1D Mk III professionally, I'll pitch in my thoughts. It's funny that you mention it now, as I expressed interest in getting one in the other thread yesterday evening. Overall, obviously, it's a great camera body, with a few minor technical issues. When Canon first released it back in 2007, many users reported having AF issues; particularly AF Servo. Canon addressed the issue with the initial "bad" batch of bodies by releasing firmware update 1.1.1, which supposedly fixed this issue. The results have been a mixed bag; some report improvement and some say that the problems remained. Canon eventually released a second revision of the body, labeled as a "blue dot" version which included a revised submirror assembly which was suspected to be the cause of the AF problems. If you can, check the serial no. of the body; if it falls between 501001 and 546561, it is not the new blue dot version. However, Canon does offer a free AF calibration for the bodies that fall within this range.
As for comparing it with a 5D Mk II - speaking from a technical standpoint, this is not a fair comparison. It's like comparing apples to oranges. The 5D uses a full frame sensor at 21.1MP whereas the 1D Mk III uses an APS-H sensor (1.3X crop factor) at 10.1MP. Where it lacks in image size, it makes up in speed. The more viable comparison would against a 1Ds Mark III as both use full frame sensors and the same image size. The 1D series is better suited for sports and fast-action shooting, whereas the 5D and 1DS series are better suited for studio work, weddings, etc. I would definitely give the 5D the edge in terms of image quality. Very few cameras surpass what this beast offers.
My guess is that Su-e's gripe about the LCD screen is that it's 230k pixels vs. the 920K pixels on the 5D. It's so much more crisper, and it gives you a better idea of whether your subject is in focus. This is my main gripe about the 40D screen; it's such a poor indicator of whether my images are sharp or not. It may look blurry/soft on the screen, but it looks just fine close up on a computer monitor.
Either way, if you do decide to purchase it, I think it would be a great piece to have in your inventory. I've always praised Canon engineers for making durable and reliable bodies, and as Mike has mentioned, it's pretty tough to switch back to the XXD bodies after you've spoiled yourself with the 1D series. I'm still contemplating whether I should get one; if you need the 10fps, then by all means....I'd love to have one, but I love the 40D so much that having a secondary as a backup would suffice for my current needs just fine.
For $2500, it be better be in pristine condition. That price is a little on the high side, but again, to each his own.
As for comparing it with a 5D Mk II - speaking from a technical standpoint, this is not a fair comparison. It's like comparing apples to oranges. The 5D uses a full frame sensor at 21.1MP whereas the 1D Mk III uses an APS-H sensor (1.3X crop factor) at 10.1MP. Where it lacks in image size, it makes up in speed. The more viable comparison would against a 1Ds Mark III as both use full frame sensors and the same image size. The 1D series is better suited for sports and fast-action shooting, whereas the 5D and 1DS series are better suited for studio work, weddings, etc. I would definitely give the 5D the edge in terms of image quality. Very few cameras surpass what this beast offers.
My guess is that Su-e's gripe about the LCD screen is that it's 230k pixels vs. the 920K pixels on the 5D. It's so much more crisper, and it gives you a better idea of whether your subject is in focus. This is my main gripe about the 40D screen; it's such a poor indicator of whether my images are sharp or not. It may look blurry/soft on the screen, but it looks just fine close up on a computer monitor.
Either way, if you do decide to purchase it, I think it would be a great piece to have in your inventory. I've always praised Canon engineers for making durable and reliable bodies, and as Mike has mentioned, it's pretty tough to switch back to the XXD bodies after you've spoiled yourself with the 1D series. I'm still contemplating whether I should get one; if you need the 10fps, then by all means....I'd love to have one, but I love the 40D so much that having a secondary as a backup would suffice for my current needs just fine.
For $2500, it be better be in pristine condition. That price is a little on the high side, but again, to each his own.
Posted by planeman
- June 09, 2010, 06:03:09 PMI have the Mark 2 and its the best camera I ever used. Auto focus is fast, even in low light and works great with my 100-400. I am thinking about upgrading to the Mark 3 or just get a second hand Mark 2 in the future. Once you get a 1-series camera you wont want to come back to a ??D.
Mike
Mike
Posted by Code20photog
- June 09, 2010, 03:58:45 PMOur station photographer Su-e Tan is looking to sell his EOS 1D MkIII. We're kinda fiddling with the $2500 range with an extra battery included.
Only been used 18 times to shoot Lakers games, and Su-e makes Duy look ADD, so it's flat out pristine.
Thoughts on the 1D MkIII in comparison to the 5D? I was playing with it around the station today and it's just awesome. The FPS is ridiculous. I haven't researched it much, but what's the image quality as compared to the 5D? Just playing with it, seems to drive the 100-400 quite well, which is what I'll mainly be using it with, and I like that it took only a few seconds to get the basic operation down.
What our photographer doesn't like is the LCD screen as opposed to the 5D, but I'm not really sure why.
Just wondering what some people here thought of the 1D MkIII.
Only been used 18 times to shoot Lakers games, and Su-e makes Duy look ADD, so it's flat out pristine.
Thoughts on the 1D MkIII in comparison to the 5D? I was playing with it around the station today and it's just awesome. The FPS is ridiculous. I haven't researched it much, but what's the image quality as compared to the 5D? Just playing with it, seems to drive the 100-400 quite well, which is what I'll mainly be using it with, and I like that it took only a few seconds to get the basic operation down.
What our photographer doesn't like is the LCD screen as opposed to the 5D, but I'm not really sure why.
Just wondering what some people here thought of the 1D MkIII.