# Should I buy a 5D3 or 1D4?



## thure1982 (Apr 5, 2012)

What's your input?
Money isn't an issue since I've been saving for some time.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 5, 2012)

What do you shoot, and in what conditions?


----------



## thure1982 (Apr 6, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> What do you shoot, and in what conditions?



Everything and nothing so to speak, from weddings to Moto-GP at the track.
I'm not such a novice that I must have high fps to get the picture at the track.

My current body is a 40D an that suits me great except low light without flash and that it is a crop-sensor and I'm looking forward to a bigger sensor.

I have the following lenses.
24-105, 70-200/2,8 IS II, 16-35 II


----------



## Viggo (Apr 6, 2012)

I find the AF of the 5d3 WAAAY better than the mk4. And almost all, I would say 90%, of what I loved about the 1-series they have now put into the 5d3. So I'm seriously considering if I want the 1d X still, the small body and the light weight of the 5d is very appealing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 6, 2012)

In that case, I'd say go with the 5DIII unless you absolutely need the better build and sealing of the 1-series (which, since you shoot with a 40D successfully, I'd say you probably don't).


----------



## Tcapp (Apr 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> In that case, I'd say go with the 5DIII unless you absolutely need the better build and sealing of the 1-series (which, since you shoot with a 40D successfully, I'd say you probably don't).



Agreed. 100%.


----------



## rlarsen (Apr 7, 2012)

Compare the specs.
If your work will benefit from a faster motor drive and a more rugged body, use the MK lV.
Both have great AF systems that come with a learning curve.
Also consider weight, flash sync-speed, and quiet shooting modes on the 5D.
Budget your money for quality lenses.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

I understand your dilema - they are both great cameras from an IQ and an AF point of view.

However the series 1 features that are not on the 5DIII might be important:

- if you shoot a lot in portrait mode then you will have to budget for grips for the 5DIII (are they available yet?)
- if you shoot a lot in portrait mode then you might find the button placements not the best around
- series 1 have have the AF point linked to the metering, the 5DIII is the centre point
- series 1 are able to select multiple AF points for metering
- series 1 have the ability to shoot in manual mode with EC( using AV and other settings - it is fabulous for action pictures)
- no dial to knock and get changed without you realising it
- far better weather and dust sealing
- long battery life means that you will need grips on the 5DIII to get (about) the same number of shots before changing

Then of course there are the headline differences

1D4 - more fps, F8 focussing

5DIII - more mps, better very low light performance, better video


----------



## thure1982 (Apr 7, 2012)

Thanks for the input.
I've been holding out for the 5D3 if it was awesome, which it seems to be.
This is a hard one.


----------



## smirkypants (Apr 7, 2012)

You might want to consider that if you shoot at a distance a lot you get further reach with the 1D4. Essentially you get a "free" 1.4 teleconverter with no loss of image quality or stops of light. Additionally, if you want to add a 2x teleconverter to an f4 lens or a 1.4x teleconverter to an f5.6 lens, you won't be able to autofocus on a 5D3 because it chokes at f8.

If you don't plan to shoot at a distance, this is all irrelevant. I'd almost certainly choose a 5D3 for portrait, events and landscape work. There are NO ultrawide lenses for the 1D4. It can't be done.


----------



## tomscott (Apr 7, 2012)

The APH format is awkward for normal shooting tho. If you are used to shooting on standard lenses then they won't be as wide won't be able to go extra wide like a FF camera or even if you are using a 10-22mm on the 40D the FF equivalent won't seem wide. But I suppose you could get used to it. Although good for extra length which is what it was designed for it is not the overall camera I was looking for especially for wedding photography when your in those tight spaces, also the 5D MKIII ISO range is useable from 1600-6400 a wedding photographers dream! FF all the way, be nice to use one of these as a second camera. Albeit an expensive one.

5D MKIII All the way its what I'm getting ))!

Ive been looking at this too but on another recent thread 5D MKIII VS 1Ds MKIII


----------



## sanyasi (Apr 7, 2012)

I'd buy the new technology. I am largely unfamiliar with the 1D4, so my take will be uninformed, but stay with me. I received my 5D, Mark III on Monday of this past week. Aside from my desktop, I haven't taken a photograph yet. I've spent considerable time reading the instructions, articles in the Canon Knowledgebase and even my old Magic Lantern book for the 5D, Mark II.

For my money, the vastly improved menu system is worth the price of the 5D Mark III. I now feel much more in control of the camera, which in part is why I am rereading basic information about some of the features that continue from the II to III.

But there are other things to consider: the new technology. Your getting their Digic 5 processor, albeit only one. I certainly am not an computer engineer, but after 25 years of dealing with computers, I know that four or five years is a long time in the tech world. Setting aside the debate about image quality (which I think will not be resolved for at least a year and is pretty pointless to begin with), I have to believe you are better off with the new processor.

You say you do shoot some sports. Much of my reading has been about the AF system. Once again, the menu system and onboard help system makes this pretty easy to use. Granted the pencils on my desk don't move like basketball players, but now that I understand the system, I am anxious to give it a try. If it is half of what I am expecting, it will be fantastic.

You should get better ISO performance. My understanding is that the weather sealing is not 1DX quality, but from what I gather, it is improved. The camera certainly feels more solid. The 6fps is more than I need. I suppose if you are covering NFL football 10fps would be an advantage.

I'd also add: I gave consideration to the new 1DX and asked my dealer if I could hold a EOS 1D Mark III. That was the deciding factor. It was really much heavier--raising camera shake issues. I am used to lugging around the 5D, Mark II with the 70-200 lens for ten or 12 hours at a time, so weight isn't a problem for me, but the Mark III's weight and bulk were noticeable--and that was without a lens attached. As my dealer said, unless you are covering the war in dusty Afghanistan or shooting in a South American rain forest for weeks on end, the new 1DX is overkill.

Good luck with the decision.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

sanyasi said:


> I'd buy the new technology. I am largely unfamiliar with the 1D4, so my take will be uninformed, but stay with me.



well there is the first problem



sanyasi said:


> But there are other things to consider: the new technology. Your getting their Digic 5 processor, albeit only one. I certainly am not an computer engineer, but after 25 years of dealing with computers, I know that four or five years is a long time in the tech world.



there is the second - the 1D4 is not even 2-1/2 years old



sanyasi said:


> Setting aside the debate about image quality (which I think will not be resolved for at least a year and is pretty pointless to begin with), I have to believe you are better off with the new processor.



Better than 2 Digic 4's - on what basis will that affect the camera?



sanyasi said:


> You say you do shoot some sports. Much of my reading has been about the AF system. Once again, the menu system and onboard help system makes this pretty easy to use. Granted the pencils on my desk don't move like basketball players, but now that I understand the system, I am anxious to give it a try. If it is half of what I am expecting, it will be fantastic.



... but better than the 1D4? The 1D4 is not exactly lacking in this area



sanyasi said:


> You should get better ISO performance.



From experience I dont believe there will be any significant difference. The 5DIII might focus better in very low light



sanyasi said:


> My understanding is that the weather sealing is not 1DX quality, but from what I gather, it is improved. The camera certainly feels more solid. The 6fps is more than I need. I suppose if you are covering NFL football 10fps would be an advantage.



Definitely



sanyasi said:


> I'd also add: I gave consideration to the new 1DX and asked my dealer if I could hold a EOS 1D Mark III. That was the deciding factor. It was really much heavier--raising camera shake issues. I am used to lugging around the 5D, Mark II with the 70-200 lens for ten or 12 hours at a time, so weight isn't a problem for me, but the Mark III's weight and bulk were noticeable--and that was without a lens attached. As my dealer said, unless you are covering the war in dusty Afghanistan or shooting in a South American rain forest for weeks on end, the new 1DX is overkill.



Weight of the equipment varies from person to person. 

I would have no problem with a 1D4 and 70-200 f/2.8 II all day - in fact I normally do plus the 1Ds3 and a 400/f/2.8

Dont listen to your dealer when he sniffs a possible sale


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 7, 2012)

I never own 1D series before, so I can't speak for it. However, the new 5D III is an amazing machine. The new AF is AWESOME, fast. Day and night different between mrk II & III in term of AF and other features.

my 50mm f1.4 and 70-200 lenses are now my favorite with 5D III. I'm going to sell my 24-105 and get the new 24-70 II.


----------



## stilscream (Apr 7, 2012)

Anyone considering 1d4 and 5d mk iii instead of the 1dx?


----------



## blufox (Apr 7, 2012)

stilscream said:


> Anyone considering 1d4 and 5d mk iii instead of the 1dx?



Yeah I am considering a used 1D mkIV for my newly found bird photography hobby. It is insanely addictive, the push to get that best avain shots of bird is alluring. 

Need to save money for 1DMkIV, can't afford 1DX with longer glass. 
a 1DMkIV + 400 2.8 IS with 2X and 1.4X TCs, along with my 70-200 will serve me okay for some years I presume.
Wish I had the money to get a 1D4. Right 550D is not cutting it for BIF lol.


----------



## Viggo (Apr 7, 2012)

dilbert said:


> thure1982 said:
> 
> 
> > What's your input?
> ...



They aren't that different, and if someone asked abouth the 5d2 and mk4, your point is a valid one. However, coming from the 1d3 and 1d4 myself and now bought a 5d3, they are different in size and weight, but the AF of the 5d3 is way better than that on the mk4. IQ is much better, and also the goodness of fullframe. And a lot of the things of the 1-series is included in the 5d; MUCH less shutter lag, MUCH less blackout time, dual card slots, zoom in directly to 100% at the focuspoint used.customization of buttons, big bright 100% VF, better battery, I get 1000 shots. Setting auto-iso range and use it in m-mode. New advanced codecs for video, audio-feedback, audio-level control. A dedicated switch between Servo and One shot, spot-af with all lenses. Setting the lower shutter speed limit (although not fully customizeable). Proper placement and size of the dof-button. And I'm sure others will think of a few other things.


----------



## altenae (Apr 7, 2012)

> but the AF of the 5d3 is way better than that on the mk4. IQ is much better, and also the goodness of fullframe



+1


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 7, 2012)

I think its a moot point. Can you find a new 1D MK IV to buy?? I actually like the 1.3 crop for giving my lenses a little more reach, but I'll stick with my 5D MK III or get a 1D X. So far, for me, a 1D X doesn't have twice the value. If it would focus with f/8 lenses, that might tip the balance.


----------



## HarryWintergreen (Apr 7, 2012)

I would go for ff. You simply shoot better images when considering the scene through the ff angle.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 7, 2012)

thure1982 said:


> What's your input?
> Money isn't an issue since I've been saving for some time.




Pffft, man-up and buy both.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

Viggo said:


> but the AF of the 5d3 is way better than that on the mk4. IQ is much better, and also the goodness of fullframe. And a lot of the things of the 1-series is included in the 5d; MUCH less shutter lag, MUCH less blackout time, dual card slots, zoom in directly to 100% at the focuspoint used.customization of buttons, big bright 100% VF, better battery, I get 1000 shots. Setting auto-iso range and use it in m-mode. New advanced codecs for video, audio-feedback, audio-level control. A dedicated switch between Servo and One shot, spot-af with all lenses. Setting the lower shutter speed limit (although not fully customizeable). Proper placement and size of the dof-button. And I'm sure others will think of a few other things.



Please define 'way better AF' than the current AF king? 

Shutter lag - you must be joking

"Setting the lower shutter speed limit (although not fully customizeable)" - it is on the 1D4 which combined with the other settings gives the equivalent of M with EC

1000 shots per battery - I would be horrified if the 1D4 didn't get 2000

In fact in nearly everything the 5DIII struggles to match the 1D4

I notice you have left out the areas where the 1D4 walks over the 5DIII, ie fps, f/8 focussing, af point metering, 8 point af selection metering

The only point that the 5DIII scores is the point AF for all lens - is that a major dealmaker? Not for many I think


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

HarryWintergreen said:


> I would go for ff. You simply shoot better images when considering the scene through the ff angle.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 7, 2012)

thure1982 said:


> What's your input?
> Money isn't an issue since I've been saving for some time.



if you can´t figure that out yourself.. depending on your needs, then maybe a 60D or 7D is enough for you?!


----------



## altenae (Apr 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > but the AF of the 5d3 is way better than that on the mk4. IQ is much better, and also the goodness of fullframe. And a lot of the things of the 1-series is included in the 5d; MUCH less shutter lag, MUCH less blackout time, dual card slots, zoom in directly to 100% at the focuspoint used.customization of buttons, big bright 100% VF, better battery, I get 1000 shots. Setting auto-iso range and use it in m-mode. New advanced codecs for video, audio-feedback, audio-level control. A dedicated switch between Servo and One shot, spot-af with all lenses. Setting the lower shutter speed limit (although not fully customizeable). Proper placement and size of the dof-button. And I'm sure others will think of a few other things.
> ...



Try the 5D mark iii. 
I have the 1d mark iv. I use it for BIF. 
With the 5D mark iii at 6 fps I have more keepers then with the mark IV at 10fps. 

Edward van Altena
www.wildlife-photos.net


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

altenae said:


> Try the 5D mark iii.
> I have the 1d mark iv. I use it for BIF.
> With the 5D mark iii at 6 fps I have more keepers then with the mark IV at 10fps.
> 
> ...



With a large white that is to be expected as the human needs more time to lock on the focus point at the right plsce on the subject. Therefore at 10fps I would expect less time locked on than at 6fps. 

So the question is really - if you do a 2 sec burst do you get more keepers from the 5DIII or the 1D4?

When it was with film I would get nearly 100% keepers on single shot because I would only be pressing the button when I was locked on.


----------



## Viggo (Apr 7, 2012)

Well, have you tried the 5d3?


----------



## Viggo (Apr 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > but the AF of the 5d3 is way better than that on the mk4. IQ is much better, and also the goodness of fullframe. And a lot of the things of the 1-series is included in the 5d; MUCH less shutter lag, MUCH less blackout time, dual card slots, zoom in directly to 100% at the focuspoint used.customization of buttons, big bright 100% VF, better battery, I get 1000 shots. Setting auto-iso range and use it in m-mode. New advanced codecs for video, audio-feedback, audio-level control. A dedicated switch between Servo and One shot, spot-af with all lenses. Setting the lower shutter speed limit (although not fully customizeable). Proper placement and size of the dof-button. And I'm sure others will think of a few other things.
> ...



59ms vs 55ms, I guess you can tell 4ms of difference?

And really, the difference in AF is pretty obvious when reading the specs, and way more obvious when actually using them.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

Viggo said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



I am not a spec peeper - I use the thing 

It was you that brought up the reduced lag - "MUCH less shutter lag" - so I guess 4ms is critical to you

"Way more obvious" - in what way - I have been out shooting BIF today and not noticed issues even though I was handholding the 400 f/4 (which is a sure way of reducing keepers)


----------



## Viggo (Apr 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Ah, seems you misunderstood... I was referring to MUCH less than the 5d2, sorry bout that....


----------



## altenae (Apr 7, 2012)

One of the best nature photographer in the Neterlands wrote:

-61 Point AF system is top notch, even blows my 1D Mark II and 1D Mark IV away... I don't know what voodoo magic Canon did, but it rocks

With two seconds burst (12) , 11 were sharp,, I mean tack sharp. 
I use the 800mm 5.6. 

Please understand the 1D mark IV is a beast, but the AF of the 5D mark iii is better. 
Maybe a personal feeling,but for me " it rocks "


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 7, 2012)

altenae said:


> One of the best nature photographer in the Neterlands wrote:
> 
> -61 Point AF system is top notch, even blows my 1D Mark II and 1D Mark IV away... I don't know what voodoo magic Canon did, but it rocks
> 
> ...



I get more than 50% of my 20 - so the same number of keepers then - obviously depends what the subject is doing, the size and the speed. In flight eagles and buzzards I would expect near 100% but blue tits maybe 10% on a good day.

I assume you are not handholding the 800 then - which makes it harder for small, quick BIF


----------



## altenae (Apr 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > One of the best nature photographer in the Neterlands wrote:
> ...



True. Blue Tits in flight is very difficult. 
Same with Swallows. 

Also some luck is needed 

Another happy BIF photographer. 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1032&thread=41154114


----------



## thure1982 (Apr 8, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> thure1982 said:
> 
> 
> > What's your input?
> ...



Thanks for not being a condescending jerk...
If I said I'm looking for a larger and better sensor then why would I get a 60D when I now own a 40D?


----------



## thure1982 (Apr 8, 2012)

Thank everyone!
Awsome info and thoughts.
My train of thoughts were about as what everyone said.
I'm gonna stay on the 5D3 waiting-list still. 


Happy easter!


----------



## cwild (Apr 9, 2012)

thure1982 said:


> Thank everyone!
> Awsome info and thoughts.
> My train of thoughts were about as what everyone said.
> I'm gonna stay on the 5D3 waiting-list still.
> ...



As a Mk iv owner who just took delivery of a 5D iii and spent yesterday shooting birds in flight I can confirm that you won't regret getting the 5D. the image quality blows away the Mk iv and I have A3 prints at 6400 iso that you would swear had been shot at 800. The only thing I really missed was the Mk iv's buffer debth, but the 5D focusing was more accurate and I can crop the images further, negating the APSH's crop sensor advantage.

The Mk iv is now up for sale - I'm buying a second 5D


----------



## danski0224 (Apr 9, 2012)

cwild said:


> As a Mk iv owner who just took delivery of a 5D iii and spent yesterday shooting birds in flight I can confirm that you won't regret getting the 5D. the image quality blows away the Mk iv and I have A3 prints at 6400 iso that you would swear had been shot at 800. The only thing I really missed was the Mk iv's buffer debth, but the 5D focusing was more accurate and I can crop the images further, negating the APSH's crop sensor advantage.
> 
> The Mk iv is now up for sale - I'm buying a second 5D



Really....? That good?


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 9, 2012)

danski0224 said:


> cwild said:
> 
> 
> > As a Mk iv owner who just took delivery of a 5D iii and spent yesterday shooting birds in flight I can confirm that you won't regret getting the 5D. the image quality blows away the Mk iv and I have A3 prints at 6400 iso that you would swear had been shot at 800. The only thing I really missed was the Mk iv's buffer debth, but the 5D focusing was more accurate and I can crop the images further, negating the APSH's crop sensor advantage.
> ...



No I dont think so. The AF of the 1D4 is very accurate so it sounds like another street myth is starting - "1D4 AF is rubbish".

6400 like 800 - shame about the lack of dr then


----------



## danski0224 (Apr 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> No I dont think so. The AF of the 1D4 is very accurate so it sounds like another street myth is starting - "1D4 AF is rubbish".
> 
> 6400 like 800 - shame about the lack of dr then



I'll admit to picking up a used 1DIV with a claimed <10k actuations and all the stuff, plus (2) batteries (one of which was never used) for just a tick over the current 5DIII price.

That camera is worlds different than a 7D.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 9, 2012)

danski0224 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > No I dont think so. The AF of the 1D4 is very accurate so it sounds like another street myth is starting - "1D4 AF is rubbish".
> ...



Good choice - as an all round camera the 1d4 is better than the 5DIII imho. Buying used means that if you sell it in the near future then you will find it will keep its price


----------



## altenae (Apr 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> danski0224 said:
> 
> 
> > cwild said:
> ...



The iso story is not correct, but believe it or not. 
There is something magic about the AF on the 5D mark iii


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 9, 2012)

altenae said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > danski0224 said:
> ...



Yes I know the AF of the 5DII is good - however the story about it being more accurate than the 1D4 is a Rockwellism


----------



## altenae (Apr 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Why is it Rockwellism?
Because a non 1d serie cannot be better then the 1d mark IV ?
Some improvements can be made in 2,5 years. 

Try the 5D for a weekend.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 9, 2012)

altenae said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > altenae said:
> ...



Why do I need a 5D to comment about the accuracy of the 1D4? It is either accurate or it isn't.


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> altenae said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



I haven't tested the two cameras side by side and chuck westfall should be taken with a grain of salt, but he even hinted the AF of the 5d3 with the 7d metering system should be better/more advanced than the 1d4 and only falls short of the 1dx because of the 100,000 rgb metering system, however in the end the proof is in the pudding and i will wait before someone with the 2 systems can test them side by side before I formally declare one better than the other.


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 9, 2012)

As i said take chuck westfall with a pinch of salt but here is an excerpt taken from an interview with him regarding the 1d4 and 1dx/5d3.

AH: The current AF system in EOS 1D Mark IV delivers excellent performance when photographing subjects like birds in flight against a varied background. In this case photographer often uses center point with a fixed number of expansion points, as opposed to color-tracking or automatic AF point/area selection given the erratic nature of the subject. What benefits does the new system bring in terms of speed and precision in this application?



CW: The number and distribution of high-precision cross-type AF points has increased on the new 61-point AF system relative to the 45-point AF system used by the EOS-1D Mark IV. Moreover:

· The overall AF system speed of the EOS-1D X including lens drive is superior to that of the EOS-1D Mark IV on a lens for lens basis. The overall AF detection speed of the EOS 5D Mark III is superior to the AF detection speed of the EOS-1D Mark IV.

· The level of AF precision for 5 of the central area AF points on the 61-point sensor (i.e., the dual X-shaped cross-type points) is superior to the level of precision for any of the AF points on the 1D Mark IV.

· 21 cross-type AF points in the central area of the 61-point sensor are functional with maximum apertures as small as f/5.6; None (zero) of the cross-type points on the EOS-1D Mark IV are functional as cross-type sensors at maximum apertures smaller than f/4.

· The 61-point AF sensor has twice the low light sensitivity as the 1D Mark IV’s 45-point AF sensor (EV -2 vs. EV -1).

· The 61-point AF system supports AI Servo III, which is superior in subject tracking stability and consistency compared to AI Servo II found on the EOS-1D Mark IV.

· The 61-point AF system adds a greater degree of user control for subjects with various characteristics of acceleration and deceleration such as birds in flight.

· The 61-point AF system not only has 16 more AF points than any of the 45-point systems, it is also 20% wider in coverage (19mm vs. 15mm), making it easier for photographers to keep their subjects within the active AF area.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 9, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > altenae said:
> ...



This is not about the 5DIII vs 1D4 AF - this point was about the comment that the 1D4 AF was not accurate. 

I would agree that on paper the 1DX reads better - but either the AF is accurate or it isn't, and I would suggest that within its pecifications it is accurate ie subject is in focus

We had the same rubbish with the 5DII accuracy - and again within it specifications it was accurate

Rubbishing bodies without a shred of evidence to support the allegations is very bad


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Fair enough... =) I got no reason to say/think the 1d4 isn't accurate, just verifying context....


----------



## smirkypants (Apr 11, 2012)

Holy Hell. I've been out shooting with the 5D3 and I just have to say that the IQ rocks. I think I love everything about this camera except the reach. Personally, I think it knees the 1D4 in the groin. Now, if they could just give me this level of IQ with a 1.6 crop, I would be a happy man, though I think it'll probably be about until the 7D Mark III until we get there.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 11, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> Holy Hell. I've been out shooting with the 5D3 and I just have to say that the IQ rocks. I think I love everything about this camera except the reach. Personally, I think it knees the 1D4 in the groin. Now, if they could just give me this level of IQ with a 1.6 crop, I would be a happy man, though I think it'll probably be about until the 7D Mark III until we get there.



I have always thought that the IQ of the 5DIII would be better than the 1D4 - the 1Ds3 is better than the 1D4 and I expect the 5DIII to be at least as good as the 1Ds3 - although we are getting to the stage where it is difficult to distinguish at low iso.

What you lose with the 5DIII are those series 1 features (like I was shooting in the rain this morning), the functions, the configurability, the 10fps, the 1.3 crop and the f8 AF

To choose is down to the package that suits each person. A 1DX with a 1D4 as spare will really rock.


----------



## danski0224 (Apr 11, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> A 1DX with a 1D4 as spare will really rock.



I am checking my couch cushions and pockets for the spare change....


----------



## smirkypants (Apr 11, 2012)

I'm going to shoot a match tomorrow. It's not that important so I'll shoot much of the thing with the 5D3. I expect that I'll have a lot fewer shots to show for it given my lack of cropping power but the shots that I have should be better. We shall see. One of the things I'm impressed with most is just how high you can push the shadow slider in Lightroom and not suffer. Heck, you can take it all the way to +100 with no worries. This is important to me because when the sun is high in the sky it creates harsh shadows on faces from the brim of the helmet. Of course I'll also be shooting with a camera/lens combination from the other guys....


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 12, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> Holy Hell. I've been out shooting with the 5D3 and I just have to say that the IQ rocks. I think I love everything about this camera except the reach. Personally, I think it knees the 1D4 in the groin. Now, if they could just give me this level of IQ with a 1.6 crop, I would be a happy man, though I think it'll probably be about until the 7D Mark III until we get there.



I'm gonna take a wild guess and say your AF must be working well then? 

good to hear I hope my replacement is like yours


----------



## markd61 (Apr 12, 2012)

As a former 1 series user I can think of no reason other than high frame rates for choosing a 1 series body. The AF of the 5Dmk3 seems to be garnering praise for its all around goodness and its general improvements have put it at a very high operational level.
The differences that people cite are, for me, trivial.
Weather sealing. What level of inclemency are we talking about that requires such "protection"? I used film and digital cameras in all sorts of rain and snow with nary a hiccup. Of course I keep it dry but will a 1series owner get it all wet?
Rugged body. Nice but heavy. Heavier after 10 hours on the job. Dropping cameras is generally a bad thing and to be avoided. As insurance, a heavy body is costly and heavy (again).
Button arrangements. You will adapt to the camera you own.
Metering. The. most.overrated.issue.ever. Metering has not made significant strides since the inclusion of meters in cameras back in the 60's despite the advances in hyping the metering systems. Film latitude and racketing saved us in film days, chimping saved us in digital. More effective is the EVF or Live View screen that previews exposure to give real-time info. Live View is slow and Canon does not yet offer EVFs.
The real drawback to the mk3 is the price relative to the mk2. As you say this is not an issue I would still vote for the mk3 for its lighter weight and better IQ.


----------



## wockawocka (Apr 12, 2012)

'Overall' the 1D4 is better than the 5D3 for general use.

Easier to use and faster at everything including AF.


----------



## cps_user (Apr 12, 2012)

hate to disagree, but I do. 

I think both camera's are not hard to operate. Yes, the 1D IV is faster. But the 5d3 is lighter and FF. 

So, it all depends on your needs. Currently I'm shooting both camera's, but I'm thinking of selling the IV and getting another 5d3. Just because it's the perfect fit for me. If you shoot birds in the rain you're probably the one buying that 1d IV from me


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 12, 2012)

markd61 said:


> As a former 1 series user I can think of no reason other than high frame rates for choosing a 1 series body. The AF of the 5Dmk3 seems to be garnering praise for its all around goodness and its general improvements have put it at a very high operational level.
> The differences that people cite are, for me, trivial.
> Weather sealing. What level of inclemency are we talking about that requires such "protection"? I used film and digital cameras in all sorts of rain and snow with nary a hiccup. Of course I keep it dry but will a 1series owner get it all wet?
> Rugged body. Nice but heavy. Heavier after 10 hours on the job. Dropping cameras is generally a bad thing and to be avoided. As insurance, a heavy body is costly and heavy (again).
> ...



I guess you didn't need M with ec

I guess you didn't need metering on the AF point

I guess you didn't need multiple AF point metering (for weddings)

I guess you didn't use a (BW) harness to stop the camera dropping

I guess you didn't need f/8 AF

I guess the 1.3 crop is not useful for you

As for shooting in bad weather - yesterday I was shooting on an outside location when the rain came, 1D4 +70-200 f/2.8II - no problem


----------



## altenae (Apr 12, 2012)

Everybody is defending his gear. 

Both are good cameras. 
Buy what you need. 

For me (will say it again) the AF of the 5D mark III rocks. 
And yes I also have the 1D mark IV. 

And when focal length is NO issue then the 5D mark III will deliver better IQ.


----------



## Viggo (Apr 12, 2012)

One of the reasons I think people say the 5d3 AF is better than the mk4 is due to the fact that it is, BUT the edge is exactly that, the EDGE SHARPNESS of the new sensor is waaaay better, which makes the contours of your subject much sharper, and therefore the picture looks better focused.


----------



## tomscott (Apr 12, 2012)

briansquibb your passion is admirable but also silly. Im really happy the 1D VI is great for you, but do you have to keep iterating points in every thread...?

The 1D VI is great but you cant argue that the 5D MKIII is a great camera also at a much smaller price point (talking new) and is pretty much a big kick in the balls to the 1 series world. For an all out do everything camera its beats the 1D VI, cheaper, lighter, quick enough, great IQ, great AF, AP-H is awkward for ordinary lengths and wide angle has to be given a miss. You are in the minority of shooter that need every single feature. For 75% of the photographer the 5D MKIII is the perfect all round camera we have all been waiting for.


----------



## DEFILER (Apr 12, 2012)

Depends on what kind of photography you enjoy or do.

For action, aviation, wildlife, photojournalism, sports; 1D-IV is a good bet

For everything else; - 5D-MKIII

If you do a little of everything; get both. 

And I only have a 1D-IV but want very badly a 5D-III. I would have said the 1D-IV also for low light performance but apparently the 5d-III has it beat there also.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 12, 2012)

altenae said:


> Everybody is defending his gear.
> 
> Both are good cameras.
> Buy what you need.
> ...



This isn't defending the gear - this is reputing the myths that get uttered about other kit to justify their own purchases.

To say that the only differences between a 1d4 and a 5DIII apart from fps is pure bunkum. The metering on the AF point is significant for the majority of shooters and to be dismissed as 'trivial' is nonsense.

On the other hand you will have seen me sugesting the 5DIII is a better buy than a 1Ds3. 

I have nothing against a 5DIII as I believe it is an excellent camera, but it does get on my goat when Rockwellisms are uttered to rubbish a body.


----------

