# 1DX Worth the Money?



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

I'm currently shooting with a 60D and 5D Mark iii. I was originally going to get the 1dx but the 5d iii came out sooner. I wanted something with high fps, and am wondering is it worth spending the money. I know it's an amazing camera, however a 1d mark 4 is a lot cheaper lol


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> I'm currently shooting with a 60D and 5D Mark iii. I was originally going to get the 1dx but the 5d iii came out sooner. I wanted something with high fps, and am wondering is it worth spending the money. I know it's an amazing camera, however a 1d mark 4 is a lot cheaper lol



If you have a 5D Mark III and are satisfied with the IQ, AND all you want to add are higher fps, then no in your case I'd say it's not worth it. Are you going to be a paid sports photographer? If not, get the 1D Mark IV. If you are, then I'd go with the 1DX over the 1D4 personally. It's a lot of money either way. I guess you could sell your 5D3 and buy a 1DX too.


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

That's true, I could sell it. But you made some good points, I think maybe the mark 4!


----------



## Bosman (Aug 15, 2012)

I shoot sports and have the 1dm3 with 10fps, I also have the 5dm3. I tell you what, i can do everything i have done with 6fps, sure it may not be able to gun as quick but honestly if you already spent the dough why spend another $4G just for the FPS unless it is work case related? Just work with it, see what you give up as opposed to what you need. Else if you got money to burn buy the 1dx. LOL


----------



## squarebox (Aug 15, 2012)

doesn't the 1dx also have better ISO performance?


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

I thought about the 1d3 so it's not 4grand for the 1d4 but the money via local sports (high school, semi pro) stuff isn't very good. There's a lot of motorcross races near by where I live which can be a cash cow lol, so basically I just wanted something that cold keep up with the high demand put on it. I've used the 5d3 for some birds and stuff but with sports sometimes thAt one extra frame would've been the shot lol


----------



## AmbientLight (Aug 15, 2012)

The main issue should be autofocus speed and frames per second. If you shoot bursts with 6 FPS and you miss a critical moment and end up only with pictures slightly before or after that moment you may want to purchase a 1D. In the digital picture review of the 1D-X there is a list of camera response times, which I have found enlightening in this respect.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

squarebox said:


> doesn't the 1dx also have better ISO performance?



Yes, but the issue here is that he already spent $3500 on a 5D Mark III. The 1D X for him, I'm guessing, on top of that isn't worth it. The 1D Mark IV is a really good camera, for much less money than a 1DX. Having a 1D Mark IV/5D Mark III combo is pretty stellar.


----------



## vuilang (Aug 15, 2012)

unless you're shooting with 2 camera side by side, I would sell the 5d3 & money from 1d4 to buy 1dx. (the 60d as backup)


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

The auto focus of the 5d3 is incredible which is why I liked the dx because it's the same system. And I'll have to read it

Ya lol it comes down to the money. Because I was looking to upgrade to the new 500mm version 2. However, wanted the fps and Preformance. And hearing such good things about the dx, Im looking for something that will last and hold up and I think it's rated for 400,000 shutter clicks right? But I've used the mark 4 which is a good camera but just didn't know if it's better to do the dx and wait on the 500

I usually have 24-70 on one and 70-200 on another or difference combos.


----------



## Menace (Aug 15, 2012)

Two camera set up sounds good. I'd suggest sell the 5dIII and invest in 1Dx - once you've made a bit of money from it then get the 500 too.


----------



## Cannon Man (Aug 15, 2012)

Mos def the 1DX, better ergonomics, better ISO noise, better built quality, better functions, longer (400 000) shutter count, AND.... more street cred


----------



## M.ST (Aug 15, 2012)

The 1D X it´s worth the price you pay for it.

If you compare it too the 5D Mark III the 1D X have:
+ better AF
+ better image quality
+ faster
+ more solid
+ 400.000 possible shutter releases to 150.000 (5D Mark III)
- bigger

Compared to the 1D IV:
+ better AF
+ better image quality
+ faster
- no crop (you need a TC or a longer lens for the same shot)

If you have only the money for one body buy the 1D X. If you have the 5D Mark III or want buy it, buy the 1D X instead.

If you have the 1D IV and you need the crop-factor. Hold the camera as long as possible.


----------



## Cannon Man (Aug 15, 2012)

M.ST said:


> The 1D X it´s worth the price you pay for it.
> 
> If you compare it too the 5D Mark III the 1D X have:
> + better AF
> ...



My opinion is that the "big" size of the 1DX is an advantage, not a negative. 5D has nothing to grip on to.. i have big enough hands that the only way to hold the 5D is with my first 2 fingers and my thumb and then the camera's sharp edge rests on my palm which is annoying. 
In 1D camera's my whole palm and all fingers are comfortably on the camera vertically and horizontally.

Your second negative was the missing 1.3x reach.. i believe that you would end up with better image quality and better noise when the 1DX is cropped to 1.3x.
And to me full frame is much more useful than a cropped sensor. if you have money for longer lenses full frame is the way to go! more light in, less dense pixels and better bokeh.

To me the 1DX is simply the best camera available!


----------



## celliottuk (Aug 15, 2012)

I've got both a 1D IV and a 1DX. 70% of the photos I do are wildlife and rock bands. I was really really happy with the performance of the 1D 1V.
The performance of the 1DX is stunning! Let me try and give you some real world comparisons. For birds in flight the IV would track the eye of the bird accurately 5 times out of 10, with the X it's 9 out of 10. When doing low light band shots, the 1D IV needed noise filtering over ISO 1600 , with the 1D X it's 16000 ! The extra shutter speed of the 1DX is welcome, but not actually noticeable in the real world
Loosing the 1.3 crop factor of the ID 1V is a pain for wildlife photography, of course you can crop afterwards, but, I'm constantly reaching for longer lenses that I don't have
The rear screen is supposed to be much better on the X, I haven't noticed a difference
The menu structure, and general firmware capability on the X is much better(More like the 7D, which I've also got)
The X is heavier, but if your are used to the weight of the IV, it's not much different
I don't like the design of having 2 CF cards, rather than 1 SD , 1CF. You can buy SD cards anywhere, and I like the idea of always being able to get a card, if the one I've got becomes lost/corrupted.
Net, net - for low light shots, the X is unbeatable. For fast action shots, the X tracking is outstanding. Everything else is good, but probably not worth the huge amount you have to pay


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

The difference between the 1d X and 5d 3 is much bigger than people realize from reading about them. The AF and the 12 fps gets you so many fantsatic images you couldn't have gotten without it. The exposure is so dead on it's ridicolous!! I hardly adjust anything in Lr. 

The tracking is awesomely superior. To me it's at least a stop better noise-wise, and the image can be pushed more without adding the crazy noise. The lower iso's are the cleanest I have seen, and also better than the 5d3.

Swap it vertically and have the exact same layout of buttons and the same grip is not to be underestimated. 

And all of the small but very important custom functions like limiting your shutterspeed range in Av mode etc makes it way worth it to me. 

The 5d3 isn't the same with AF and tracking, it isn't the same IQ wise as the 1d X has much less noise and have WAY sharper files.


----------



## Studio1930 (Aug 15, 2012)

This is a tough one to answer for someone else, but for me the 1DX was a big advantage. I currently use a 1D4 and a 1DX and my keeper rate has more than doubled from the 1D4 when using the 1DX. Yep, easily more than doubled. The 12 fps makes a big difference when shooting fast action sports like this. 

http://youtu.be/jNa5h5eE7gQ?hd=1


----------



## pedro (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> The difference between the 1d X and 5d 3 is much bigger than people realize from reading about them. The AF and the 12 fps gets you so many fantsatic images you couldn't have gotten without it. The exposure is so dead on it's ridicolous!! I hardly adjust anything in Lr.
> 
> The tracking is awesomely superior. To me it's at least a stop better noise-wise, and the image can be pushed more without adding the crazy noise. The lower iso's are the cleanest I have seen, and also better than the 5d3.
> 
> ...



It is quite obvious. Things have to be like that. Otherwise you'd be wrong to spend such an awful lot of money on a PJ workhorse. I am glad for every pro who is equipped with excellent gear via the 1DX. As an amateur who hardly commercialzes his photography but who appreciates some better high ISO and IQ, I will go 5D3 within the next months from my current 30D which I am shooting since five years. It always delivered decent results even at ISO 3200 b/w, exposed to the right. So Robert Frank high ISO shots, here I come ;-) I don't worry about decent noise nor blown highlights by pushing it to the limit since I've seen his photography. Sometimes even slight motion blur adds to a b/w photograph.
@Viggo: Did you take any pictures at "insane ISOs" as high as 102 and/or 204 k...? Would be intresting if you had some shots to share. Keep the good work up! Cheers, Peter


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

pedro said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > The difference between the 1d X and 5d 3 is much bigger than people realize from reading about them. The AF and the 12 fps gets you so many fantsatic images you couldn't have gotten without it. The exposure is so dead on it's ridicolous!! I hardly adjust anything in Lr.
> ...



Just for the record, I am too just a hobbyist, and I don't think I have earned even a thousand dollars in 12 years of digital photo, lol.

I can take a few for you later tonight, but I have to say, I don't see the need for me to go beyond 25600, both because it's noisy and because with fast lenses, it almost doesn't exist a situation where I need to. Maybe for depth in video...


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 15, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> I'm currently shooting with a 60D and 5D Mark iii. I was originally going to get the 1dx but the 5d iii came out sooner. I wanted something with high fps, and am wondering is it worth spending the money. I know it's an amazing camera, however a 1d mark 4 is a lot cheaper lol



If *s-p-e-e-d* is important to you, 1D X will take care of that, plus better AF.

Friend of mine has 1D X. We went to Pomono racetrack in CA to compare the two cameras. fps + AF on 1D X made my 5D III looks like a kid toy. 1st couple times I shot with 1D X, I was able to get 6-8 good pics out of 12.

But when speed is no longer a factor, both 5D III and 1D X are quite neck-to-neck in term of IQ. Holding 1D X body is a big different from 5D III. I have smaller hand, I'm not sure this is the camera for me.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

I have both the 1DX and 5D3. The files from the 1DX are NOT way sharper than the 5D3 and the high ISO noise from both cameras at 25600 are unusable. So easy to spend someone else's money. The only reason I bought the 1DX is because yes, it is superior to the 1D4. But I get paid to shoot sports. If I didn't get paid to shoot sports, the 5D3/1D4 combo would be MORE than enough for me.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 15, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> I'm currently shooting with a 60D and 5D Mark iii. I was originally going to get the 1dx but the 5d iii came out sooner. I wanted something with high fps, and am wondering is it worth spending the money. I know it's an amazing camera, however a 1d mark 4 is a lot cheaper lol


Are you asking if it will earn more money than the cameras you have? That really depends on whether it will allow you to get money shots that lesser cameras might not be able to capture.
If photography is a hobby, and its required to do what you need, you have no choice.
My take is that its the ruggedness, low light capability, high AF speed that set it apart from the 5D MK III. For a average user, this is not going to justify the price difference, but if you need those features than get it.
Some of us, of course, like to have the best possible tools, and get one if we can afford it.


----------



## pedro (Aug 15, 2012)

@viggo: Highly appreciated! Thanks a lot! I know the 5D3 does 102K. So craziness within me to go for insane ISOs exists...LOL. So I will have to say to myself: Well, look man, the 5D3 does 51k like the 1Dx does the 102k.


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 15, 2012)

Here's an unbiased POV... There is a saying... once you go black, you never go back... while that could be interpreted in so many ways, (get your head out of the gutter people!), it's hard to go lesser in anything once you experience the best of any one thing... You dont go from a driving a Lexus to driving a hyundai, that is unless something drastic happened to your personal situation. That being said, if there is something lacking, in your case, FPS, then the next logical choice is to step up to the next line of camera. AF, same module, just different tracking engines and metering engines... so that's an edge to the 1dx, but that's not to say that the 5d3 is an inferior camera in any way. IQ... 4 less megapixels, so it will be slightly cleaner thanks to physics... how much is the cleaner files due to smaller sensor and how much is from a better sensor... TBD. 

For me, i know professionals charging 15,000-20,000 a wedding shooting 5d2's in program mode and have 5d3's on order, and I know pro's making less than me with 1dx's and D4's... I wont discourage anyone from getting the best gear they can afford, but i also know the difference between need and want. Do I want the 1dx? hell ya. Do i need it? nope. For me, will it earn me any more $$ than my 5d3? Not unless I start working for sports illustrated or espn. I love how my 7d guns through 8 FPS but in reality, I could probably count on 1 hand how many times I required that burst to get the shot i wanted... I can see how different people, depending on different shooting styles and needs will require different feature sets, and if that's your situation, go for it. But first, think rationally, do you NEED the 12 FPS... will it earn you money? Will it help you get a shot that your current gear cannot achieve? Are you hitting a ceiling right now with your current gear? Or is it a splurge that is nice to have the emblem on the neckstrap and the bragging rights that your camera is worth more than your friends car? We can debate different peoples merits and if one truly needs a certain gear or if a certain amateur or hobbyist really should get gear that a lot of pro's cannot even justify buying. To me, i dont upgrade unless I feel i've reached my ceiling and plateaued with a certain gear or if I feel it can take my photography to the next level and inspiration. Only you can answer these questions... But take in consideration your return on investment if any, and take in consideration want vs need... Then you'll come to the right conclusions...


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> I have both the 1DX and 5D3. The files from the 1DX are NOT way sharper than the 5D3 and the high ISO noise from both cameras at 25600 are unusable. So easy to spend someone else's money. The only reason I bought the 1DX is because yes, it is superior to the 1D4. But I get paid to shoot sports. If I didn't get paid to shoot sports, the 5D3/1D4 combo would be MORE than enough for me.



Why would I say something I don't see? It makes no sense. I'm just saying what the differences are, because a lot of people say, meh, it's no difference. Well, that is wrong. And why would it cost twice the money if 4 less mp and a bigger body was all that was between them??

To your defense, I haven't used any other raw-converter than Lightroom 4, and process the 5d3 files in Lr and it is STILL as we talked about when the 5d3 was new, the images aren't as sharp as the 5d2.

If it is the files from the 1d X or if it is MUCH better support in Lr, I don't know, but I have shot 20.000 images with the 5d3 with Reikan calibrated lenses and I haven't gotten one image sharp as I did from the 5d2 or the 1d4. The 1d X is way different, I can apply much less sharpening to get them truly sharp, and overdoing it a tad makes them pop like crazy. 

I don't care if people say they are very simmilar. Trying to shoot my kids with the 5d3 was incredibley much easier than with the 1d4, but with the 1d X EVERY shot is perfectly exposed and focused, and I always have the right moment in a burst. 

And the perfectly exposed images results in much less rescuing in post which also leads to less noise. 

I do agree that you have to be very careful with the 25600 iso, but compare 6400 iso and the 1d is HIGHLY useable and they clean up very nicley, whilst the 5d3 is gritty and ugly. The new lightmetering in the 1d X had a lot more to say than I first thought, as I said, no need to rescue an image, it just sticks.

If that matters to YOU, I have no idea and I don't care, but if it is someone out there who wonders if the 5d3 is the best there is and like me, want to buy the best even if they don't earn that in within 4 months (or at all), the answer is very clear....

If you don't have the money to spend on a 1d X, fine, not all people have it or even remotley close too wanting to spend it. But if you do, don't settle for the 5d3 when you can have an EPIC smilemachine in the 1d X.


----------



## JR (Aug 15, 2012)

as a very happy user, my simple answer is YES!


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

Here's three images shot at 51200, 102400 and 204800, quick and dirty.

They're just imported into to Lr and Color noise reduction set to 20, nothing else done. I adjusted the light so the exposure would read the same. It was nearly complete darkness at 204800, yet with the side af-point, non crosstype, expanded with 4 hit focus in One Shot. The images are uncropped full size jpegs.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I have both the 1DX and 5D3. The files from the 1DX are NOT way sharper than the 5D3 and the high ISO noise from both cameras at 25600 are unusable. So easy to spend someone else's money. The only reason I bought the 1DX is because yes, it is superior to the 1D4. But I get paid to shoot sports. If I didn't get paid to shoot sports, the 5D3/1D4 combo would be MORE than enough for me.
> ...



I don't think anyone was arguing that the 5D3 was the best ever. However, if you are shooting weddings with a 5D3 and getting paid, the 1DX will get you no additional business or money. The photos to the normal person do not look any different. People are not pixel peepers. I've tested the 5D3 and 1DX at all ISO's. 25,600 and above on both are unusable. In fact, they had the exact same level of noise it appeared. Therefore, the high ISO crap doesn't hold too well with me, considering I can shoot with both at 12,800 and and don't need to go higher.

I can't wait for the day the 1DX replacement comes out and then the 1DX will suddenly be crap and we should all be spending the money for the new $8000 replacement, because there will be "no comparison between the two."


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 15, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



I couldn't agree more... I guess that's one of the big factors with pro photography... It's not a matter of "if you can only have 1 camera"... but there is so much other stuff we contend with... strobes, softboxes, modifies, on/off camera flash, rigs (if your incorporating video), stands, lenses, cameras, computers, storage, maintenance, living expenses... yes just about every photographer to some extend deals with some if not most of these, but in the end, unless the return of investment is there, if a lesser gear can pull off what we are putting out at the same quality or ease, then is splurging a good investment? Some use the best gear, and I applaud them... Some get by with the bare minimum and charge an arm and a leg for their stuff... kudos... There's no right or wrong answer to what gear people use, but to splurge just to splurge especially if you get nothing back from it, to me, is silly... instead of spending the $3000 extra on the camera, what about investing in quality lights, PW, backdrops, stands, props, posing tables... crap you could have more than most studios and have a more well rounded photography experience... but, if a 1dx is your thing, knock yourself out.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

Who says I don't have lights? That has nothing to do with it. It's not splurging, it's not my job. I invest in memories and do this for my own sake. Stop judging something you know nothing about... 

And yeah, in a studio situation , I agree, you shouldn't get a 1d X, the 5d2 will du a killer job. But I don't spend more than an hour a year in studio invironment. I like to take my lights out, and shoot things that move.

I agree that clients would never see the difference, but I know what I can and can't get with those two cameras. In fact I do think there is no comparison between the 1d4 and the 1d X.

I have a very specific wish and personal demand for a camera, and the 1d X is the first camera that really feels like a giant leap there.

People tell me, oh, that's a nice picture, well you should see the 10 moments I didn't catch... that's how I think...


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Who says I don't have lights? That has nothing to do with it. It's not splurging, it's not my job. I invest in memories and do this for my own sake. Stop judging something you know nothing about...
> 
> And yeah, in a studio situation , I agree, you shouldn't get a 1d X, the 5d2 will du a killer job. But I don't spend more than an hour a year in studio invironment. I like to take my lights out, and shoot things that move.
> 
> ...



I'm still confused. What moments aren't you catching? I've shot basketball with a 5D3 and didn't miss one shot. What are you shooting?


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I have both the 1DX and 5D3. The files from the 1DX are NOT way sharper than the 5D3 and the high ISO noise from both cameras at 25600 are unusable. So easy to spend someone else's money. The only reason I bought the 1DX is because yes, it is superior to the 1D4. But I get paid to shoot sports. If I didn't get paid to shoot sports, the 5D3/1D4 combo would be MORE than enough for me.
> ...



I wonder if you can feel the Ferrari's engine when driving down Nathan Road in Hong Kong? 

Make no sense to spend extra cash on the features that you do not need. Regardless the out comes on both bodies, PP still needed at the end. My 2cents.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

Things the 5d couldn't catch at f1,2. Try catching the eyeball of a running person up close with the 50 L, and have the right moment, under any circumstance. 

Basketball with a 70-200 at 2,8 is different. I don't why people need so bad for me to not need a 1d, I try to offer my advice and thoughts since I've had both and the 5d since April. I am not the only one who likes and wants the 1d over the 5d and feeling it is absolutely worth it. Is it worth it to you?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Things the 5d couldn't catch at f1,2. Try catching the eyeball of a running person up close with the 50 L, and have the right moment, under any circumstance.
> 
> Basketball with a 70-200 at 2,8 is different. I don't why people need so bad for me to not need a 1d, I try to offer my advice and thoughts since I've had both and the 5d since April. I am not the only one who likes and wants the 1d over the 5d and feeling it is absolutely worth it. Is it worth it to you?



Everybody wants you to have a 1DX and enjoy it. What they don't want is to come up for justification of it using shortcomings of the 5D3 which don't really exist. I'm glad you enjoy your 1DX and are getting great shots from it. But you don't need to justify it to anyone but you. You don't have to list shortcomings of the 5D3 to justify the 1DX. I use each for a specific purpose. When I do baby pictures or weddings, I'm banking on the 5D3 because I can use the extra 4 mp with they way I crop. And yes I can notice 22 vs 18. For sports, however, I leave the 5D3 at home and shoot with the 1DX, because it's way better. Enjoy it for what you need to do/want to do. It is nice to hear your perspective since you got rid of the 5D3 for a 1DX. I kept both for different reasons.


----------



## Bombsight (Aug 15, 2012)

It's not a question of it "being worth the money" which, btw, is a stupid question.

Only you can make having or buying a 1DX worth spending the $$$. :

Your question is along the same line as somebody telling a great photographer that his "camera takes good pictures". Tha camera doesnt take pictures, the owner of that camera does.


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Who says I don't have lights? That has nothing to do with it. It's not splurging, it's not my job. I invest in memories and do this for my own sake. Stop judging something you know nothing about...
> 
> And yeah, in a studio situation , I agree, you shouldn't get a 1d X, the 5d2 will du a killer job. But I don't spend more than an hour a year in studio invironment. I like to take my lights out, and shoot things that move.
> 
> ...



Stop judging on what know nothing about? Are you serious? I do this stuff for a living... I think i've got a good grasp of the photography industry. I dont know about your personal taste and spending habit, and frankly between you, neuro and briansquib, i'd love to have your disposable income... unfortunately i've got 2 kids to feed and keep a sucessful business afloat amidst dozens of wanna be photographers crawling all over craigslist offering photography for a song and a dance, and other nation wide photo companies that have the overhead to offer print prices at ridiculously low rates... Money, in the photography business, is vital... To me the 5d3 purchase was a big purchase, probably the most i spent on any one piece of equipment I've gotten to date, period... Is the 1dx a better camera, yes, but can it deliver photos I cannot get with the 5d3? hell no. Would I make 1 more dime if i got the 1dx over the 5d3? nope, but I tell ya what, I would be out of business and a hobbyist, just like you. Stop being so freaking defensive.

Yes, I'm in the business of capturing memories, but unlike you, i'm paid to capture sometimes strangers memories whom i know nothing about. I dont have the luxury of rapid firing while a bride walks down the isle hoping i get 1 in focus... If i went that approach I wouldn't have card space to get past the ceremony. Everyshot is calculated, composed, and done just the way I want it. Do I get missed shots? Before the 5d3, constantly... but I'd regroup and make sure I nail the next. Just shot a wedding recently... Ceremony natural light with ISO's bouncing in the 20,000 range... didn't miss a shot... The rest was flash and my keeper rate was in the 60-70%, with a lot of the non-keepers being duplicates... please dont talk down to me like an idiot, I know what I'm talking about... you got a 1dx, good for you... but from my experience, if you cannot get a shot with a lesser camera and you need that top of the line camera to pull it off, it may say more about the photographer and not so much about the camera.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > Things the 5d couldn't catch at f1,2. Try catching the eyeball of a running person up close with the 50 L, and have the right moment, under any circumstance.
> ...



The OP asked about if it's worth the money, and yes it is. And for me to just say yes, would prompt someone to ask, why, what's better?

And that's what I did. 

But fair enough. We have different needs and style. I also shoot a lot of kids, and I don't need to crop there, I would crop for sports, so there's one difference. And nothing wrong with either. 

This is why Canon make the 1100d and the 600d (and the 650d was just to show you how black rubber can turn white, apparently : and the 5d's and the 1d's. We all now the same thing here. There's good reason why they make all of them. Different needs and wants.

And we can argue until we are blue in the face of which one is better. I have friends who use the first 5d, because it has better edge sharpness than enay other camera on the planet. I'm not getting into that, I'll just take it for what is, and argument for or against something and make up my own mind.

*shakehands* bdunbar79


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > Who says I don't have lights? That has nothing to do with it. It's not splurging, it's not my job. I invest in memories and do this for my own sake. Stop judging something you know nothing about...
> ...



Yes I am serious! 

You wanna hear my story? I just moved 6 hours from where I have lived all my life. I have a 3yr old boy and a 9 month old daughter, we bought a house, we don't have jobs. Guess what, that doesn't have ANYTHING to do with this. My income? That doesn't matter. I am a dedicated saver by nature. I bought a t-shirt in 2006, my newest piece of clothing. I eat water. That's how I can afford what I want. Including the 1d X. None of this matter at all.

You might know about photography business, which I never claimed nor am a part of. 

"if you cannot get a shot with a lesser camera and you need that top of the line camera to pull it off, it may say more about the photographer and not so much about the camera"

Then why are you using a 5d3 and not a Canonet QL17?

And please tell this to the sports photogs who shot in the Olympics and others that depend on great gear to perform what they want and/or need.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



You got it. Hey, I agree it was worth the money. I bought one didn't I?


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

Well, interesting conversations. My whole point to this when I asked "is it worth the money", not meaning should I go spend 7 grand on a camera, but meaning are the features the 1dx offers worth the $7,000 price tag. And from what people have posted, it seems like if your using a professional level camera, it's amazing. For my needs of what I'm wanting a camera to do, the 1dx might be a tad over kill when a mark4 would work just fine, but I use the 5d3 for landscape nature portraits, anything that the more pixels the better. And I use the 60D for mainly just macro and or will attach a 70-200 or the 500 being its not full frame. But shooting wildlife and sports, the 5d3 just isn't as fast as I wish it could be fps wise. The auto focus is snappy and will lock on, and 6fps isn't to shabby, but just isn't fast enough to capture small birds in flight or more of a moment happening in some sport. I do make a little money selling wildlife prints and things to do with sporting stuff, but I figured id be getting a used mark4 unless there's some place that has it new, but new is $5,000, and used range from 3-4,500. So I figure I'd be using the camera a lot I'd want something it be worth the price and last. Which the 1dx will do. Lol but this thread turned into something different so I guess I should've phrased my question better instead of being so vague.


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 15, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> Well, interesting conversations. My whole point to this when I asked "is it worth the money", not meaning should I go spend 7 grand on a camera, but meaning are the features the 1dx offers worth the $7,000 price tag. And from what people have posted, it seems like if your using a professional level camera, it's amazing. For my needs of what I'm wanting a camera to do, the 1dx might be a tad over kill when a mark4 would work just fine, but I use the 5d3 for landscape nature portraits, anything that the more pixels the better. And I use the 60D for mainly just macro and or will attach a 70-200 or the 500 being its not full frame. But shooting wildlife and sports, the 5d3 just isn't as fast as I wish it could be fps wise. The auto focus is snappy and will lock on, and 6fps isn't to shabby, but just isn't fast enough to capture small birds in flight or more of a moment happening in some sport. I do make a little money selling wildlife prints and things to do with sporting stuff, but I figured id be getting a used mark4 unless there's some place that has it new, but new is $5,000, and used range from 3-4,500. So I figure I'd be using the camera a lot I'd want something it be worth the price and last. Which the 1dx will do. Lol but this thread turned into something different so I guess I should've phrased my question better instead of being so vague.



As i mentioned in my posts, if your pushing the limits of your gear and you need to upgrade, by all means... Is the 1dx worth the $2k more than the 1d4... I dont know quite what to say... part of me says you get full frame which may or may not be beneficial to bird and sports photography with no crop, but you get killer ISO, a better AF, and a more enhances ergonomics and feature set... as one person said, the 5d3 and a 1d4 is a killer combo... but then again a cropped down 18MP full frame image to match the crop of 1.3, and then uprez'd from there to match the resolution of the 18MP of the 1d4... I guess to me whatever file is cleaner then would win my money if I was in the market to buy one.


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Yes I am serious!
> 
> You wanna hear my story? I just moved 6 hours from where I have lived all my life. I have a 3yr old boy and a 9 month old daughter, we bought a house, we don't have jobs. Guess what, that doesn't have ANYTHING to do with this. My income? That doesn't matter. I am a dedicated saver by nature. I bought a t-shirt in 2006, my newest piece of clothing. I eat water. That's how I can afford what I want. Including the 1d X. None of this matter at all.
> 
> ...



I am shooting with the 5d3 as per my principle of upgrading when i've outgrown my cameras... and this is where I am at. I've shot with the D60's, 10D's, 30D's, film rebels, medium format 645's and 2.25 squares, 4x5's... i've shot when each frame, each click of the shutter cost me money, and I had to make sure I made every shot count... Frankly as I said before, we are spoiled to have such great cameras and have no expense of film... If you feel the need to burst through 1000 pictures at a wedding or more... go ahead... It is what it is... You say the 1dx is the best camera for your money and it's worth it and I pointed out much more important tools to enhance your toolkit (from a professionals point of view) and you jumped all over me. 

Your story is great and I hope you are raising your kids with no sacrifices with your camera addiction. I know just like you do how expensive they are, hence I dont get all the gear I would love... I make due with what I need to get by jobs... when I get a job which justifies new gear, that, to me, is the only time i'm allowed to splurge on camera gear... I nailed a large contract recently with Union Pacific... I got a new strobe kit... As i said, i could save every penny and live on top ramon and do whatever to skimp and get the 1dx's and the TS lenses and so on and so forth, but in the end, it's just not worth it... I've gone to some of these seminars taught by some of the top pro's in the photography industry... Some larger than others, all with larger paychecks than my own, and only a small percentage use 1d series cameras even though to them it would be chump change.. To me, that tells me that in the right hands, there's nothing a 1d camera can do that a 5d or lesser camera cant do. 

There is a point where a 1d body is necessary, and I'm not claiming the contrary... Sports Photogs, photojournalists, photogs out in the elements where another camera would be toast... but by any means, it isn't the end all to be all. You shoot your camera, I shoot my camera... lets meet up one day to compare images.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 15, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> Well, interesting conversations. My whole point to this when I asked "is it worth the money", not meaning should I go spend 7 grand on a camera, but meaning are the features the 1dx offers worth the $7,000 price tag. And from what people have posted, it seems like if your using a professional level camera, it's amazing. For my needs of what I'm wanting a camera to do, the 1dx might be a tad over kill when a mark4 would work just fine, but I use the 5d3 for landscape nature portraits, anything that the more pixels the better. And I use the 60D for mainly just macro and or will attach a 70-200 or the 500 being its not full frame. But shooting wildlife and sports, the 5d3 just isn't as fast as I wish it could be fps wise. The auto focus is snappy and will lock on, and 6fps isn't to shabby, but just isn't fast enough to capture small birds in flight or more of a moment happening in some sport. I do make a little money selling wildlife prints and things to do with sporting stuff, but I figured id be getting a used mark4 unless there's some place that has it new, but new is $5,000, and used range from 3-4,500. So I figure I'd be using the camera a lot I'd want something it be worth the price and last. Which the 1dx will do. Lol but this thread turned into something different so I guess I should've phrased my question better instead of being so vague.



Yeah, things went off course a tad :

I think a used 1d4 will be a great value for money. I loved that camera, the only problem with it as far as I'm concerned, was the lower light tracking abillities. And that was because I had high expectations coming from a huge let down with an early 1d3 and the 1d4, new, was very expensive too.

But it had everything you expect from a 1d and is a real joy to use! And a better placement and feel of the ISO button than the 1d X


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > Yes I am serious!
> ...



I think your spot on as far as the photographer makes the picture not the camera. I hate photoshop and lightroom and always try to not edit photos except for exposure and crop, the simple stuff. I started with an old AE1 with just a 50mm, and sad to say I rarely use it anymore because it cost 25$ just to get the film developed to digital. And we are spoiled with high fps and if we dont like a shot just delete it. Had a rebel and upgraded to a 60D and then got the 5d mark iii. And when you compare a 60D to a 5D3 image, sadly there is no comparison. The 5d3's pixels, clarity, color just straight out of the camera raw is amazing. The 1dx all around is prolly a better camera than the 5d3, but really for me it just has the higher fps. sure, the autofocus, iso etc may be better than the fd3, but the price tag it really high lol. From what people have posted and ive read, for now itd prolly be better to stick with a 1d4, 1d3 or even just a 7d. Its just those darn Craigslist photographers lol ruining everything


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

Viggo said:


> DMITPHOTO said:
> 
> 
> > Well, interesting conversations. My whole point to this when I asked "is it worth the money", not meaning should I go spend 7 grand on a camera, but meaning are the features the 1dx offers worth the $7,000 price tag. And from what people have posted, it seems like if your using a professional level camera, it's amazing. For my needs of what I'm wanting a camera to do, the 1dx might be a tad over kill when a mark4 would work just fine, but I use the 5d3 for landscape nature portraits, anything that the more pixels the better. And I use the 60D for mainly just macro and or will attach a 70-200 or the 500 being its not full frame. But shooting wildlife and sports, the 5d3 just isn't as fast as I wish it could be fps wise. The auto focus is snappy and will lock on, and 6fps isn't to shabby, but just isn't fast enough to capture small birds in flight or more of a moment happening in some sport. I do make a little money selling wildlife prints and things to do with sporting stuff, but I figured id be getting a used mark4 unless there's some place that has it new, but new is $5,000, and used range from 3-4,500. So I figure I'd be using the camera a lot I'd want something it be worth the price and last. Which the 1dx will do. Lol but this thread turned into something different so I guess I should've phrased my question better instead of being so vague.
> ...



Think I shall wait on the greatest canon camera atm haha and stick with an older 1dmark3/4 or 7d


----------



## Larry_Chen (Aug 15, 2012)

For me it was worth it

You guys want real world examples?

http://www.speedhunters.com/2012/07/the-art-darkness/

http://www.speedhunters.com/2012/08/pikes-peak-part-1/

-Larry


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 15, 2012)

Larry_Chen said:


> For me it was worth it
> 
> You guys want real world examples?
> 
> ...


Some great shots! The one during the night what were you shooting at?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 15, 2012)

Well I made my final sale decision today. I did not go with a second 1DX, but rather kept my 1D Mark IV and sold my 1Ds Mark III and a 5D Mark III I had earlier. I really like the colors and extra reach with IQ on the 1D Mark IV for outdoor sports. So yes, one 1DX was probably worth the 6800 but I decided the 1D4 was so good I wanted to keep that, and then the 5D3 for weddings/baby photos and quiet sports like tennis and golf. Either way on the 1D4 you won't be disappointed, should you choose that route.


----------



## nightbreath (Aug 16, 2012)

Viggo said:


> People tell me, oh, that's a nice picture, well you should see the 10 moments I didn't catch... that's how I think...



Great phrasing ;D


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 19, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Well I made my final sale decision today. I did not go with a second 1DX, but rather kept my 1D Mark IV and sold my 1Ds Mark III and a 5D Mark III I had earlier. I really like the colors and extra reach with IQ on the 1D Mark IV for outdoor sports. So yes, one 1DX was probably worth the 6800 but I decided the 1D4 was so good I wanted to keep that, and then the 5D3 for weddings/baby photos and quiet sports like tennis and golf. Either way on the 1D4 you won't be disappointed, should you choose that route.



I decided to go with a 500 f4 instead of the dx and I'm now looking for a 1d3 or 1d4 ! The 4 would be nicer with the 16 mp but most with pretty high shutter count seem to all be $4,500+ when new they were $5,000 I think lol but thanks for your post!


----------



## kaihp (Aug 19, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> I decided to go with a 500 f4 instead of the dx and I'm now looking for a 1d3 or 1d4 ! The 4 would be nicer with the 16 mp but most with pretty high shutter count seem to all be $4,500+ when new they were $5,000 I think lol but thanks for your post!


B&H have two 1D4's for $4000-$4200, and you should be able to get them for around $3500 I hear.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 19, 2012)

Is it worth the money? I'd say yes it is. I shot the home opener this evening for Men's Soccer at Ashland U. and it was such a delight to shoot with! I used a 400mm f/2.8L IS version I lens and a 70-200L II IS, alternating, here and there. Normally I'd put the 70-200 on the 1D4, but I wanted a pure 1DX testing. I will have photos later but I didn't have one out of focus shot. It locks on and fires that fast. What was amazing is that I set my shutter speed at 1/640s and f/6.3, and auto ISO and shot all night that way, and the noise is very low and had no problem maintaining fast shutter and good DOF. I will have photos to share later, either in this thread or the 1DX Images thread.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 19, 2012)

I'd also like to point out that the 1D Mark IV is still worth the$3500-$4000 it sells for. Remember, I kept it instead of selling it for another 1DX. I love the 1.3x crop factor and let me tell you, that would have really come in handy this evening on the zoom lens! Next Saturday the 25th is my next soccer game, with the football home opener on August 30th at 7pm. I'll share my photos.

Tell you what, I may get a flickr account dedicated to my sports photos because AU doesn't want all of them obviously. This way I can subsection photos with the 1DX and 1D4 for us (the board) and then I can just share the link. If anybody would be interested in me doing that, I would be more than willing to. I'll be doing tennis with the 5D3, so we'd essentially have a website with only 1DX, 1D4, and 5D3 sports photos.


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 19, 2012)

$3,500 would be nice! 

I know the camera will maintain its value but the onesi find seem to be like buying it new lol. And I still like the dx because of the ISO Preformance and 14 amazing fps lol! But I'd love to see some images if u post them in the dx thread or wherever! Cause dx will be better than mark 4 but really only 2 less mp and 10'fps? How is the make 4's ISO Preformance!? Like at most indoor arenas I've shot in, well hockey I think I was at 800-1000 iso but football etc you don't have that white ice reflecting light, but has the mark 4 iso like 500-2000 ish?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 19, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> $3,500 would be nice!
> 
> I know the camera will maintain its value but the onesi find seem to be like buying it new lol. And I still like the dx because of the ISO Preformance and 14 amazing fps lol! But I'd love to see some images if u post them in the dx thread or wherever! Cause dx will be better than mark 4 but really only 2 less mp and 10'fps? How is the make 4's ISO Preformance!? Like at most indoor arenas I've shot in, well hockey I think I was at 800-1000 iso but football etc you don't have that white ice reflecting light, but has the mark 4 iso like 500-2000 ish?



I've shot with the 1D4 and plan on shooting again, at ISO 6400. If you apply NR out of the camera, in LR or ACR, it is acceptable. I have no reservation shooting basketball and volleyball with the 1DX/1D4 combo. Remember when this camera was new, it was THE sports camera.


----------



## Zusje (Aug 19, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Well I made my final sale decision today. I did not go with a second 1DX, but rather kept my 1D Mark IV and sold my 1Ds Mark III and a 5D Mark III I had earlier. I really like the colors and extra reach with IQ on the 1D Mark IV for outdoor sports. So yes, one 1DX was probably worth the 6800 but I decided the 1D4 was so good I wanted to keep that, and then the 5D3 for weddings/baby photos and quiet sports like tennis and golf. Either way on the 1D4 you won't be disappointed, should you choose that route.
> ...


I've done the same but in a different order, I have the 5Diii and just bought a second hand 1D IV(wanted the f/p/s, but also the 1.3 crop) for Au$3,300.00 (the prices you mention seem excessive) with low shutter count, only problem was the sensor was filthy, now I'm saving for a 500 f/4L.


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 19, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> DMITPHOTO said:
> 
> 
> > $3,500 would be nice!
> ...



Sounds fantastic!!! Thanks


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 19, 2012)

Zusje said:


> DMITPHOTO said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



What's the AU to US conversion lol? But I'm aussiming that's still a good price! How do you like it?


----------



## nikkito (Aug 19, 2012)

every penny worth


----------



## Zusje (Aug 20, 2012)

DMITPHOTO said:


> Zusje said:
> 
> 
> > DMITPHOTO said:
> ...


Au$3300 =US$3455.76. approx. all the used 1D IVs on Ebay at the moment seem to be going for about that- give or take a few hundred. 
Loving my 1D IV so far, although I haven't had opportunity to use it a great deal yet. Shots I've missed have been due to user error, it loves the best lenses and performs well with those, doesn't much like my Kenko pro 2xTC :'(


----------



## Secretariat (Aug 20, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> DMITPHOTO said:
> 
> 
> > I'm currently shooting with a 60D and 5D Mark iii. I was originally going to get the 1dx but the 5d iii came out sooner. I wanted something with high fps, and am wondering is it worth spending the money. I know it's an amazing camera, however a 1d mark 4 is a lot cheaper lol
> ...




If I mainly shoot sports,would it be worth it to upgrade from the Canon 1D MKIV to the 1DX?Would I miss the reach factor a lot of 1D MKIV if I switched to the 1DX?And lastly,how much better is the IQ of the 1DX than the 1D MKIV?
Thanks.


----------



## charlesa (Aug 20, 2012)

I believe I answered your question in another appropriate thread Secret.


----------

