# 5D Mark III vs. 1D Mark IV



## mw (Apr 19, 2012)

I currently own a 5D Mark II. Great camera and I don't want to part it. 

I'd like to add one more camera, but not sure if I should get the 5D Mark III or the 1D Mark IV. Main use for sport photography, but would also use for portrait and video. 

Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated. 

Thanks.


----------



## Pixel (Apr 19, 2012)

I'm using both currently (5DM3 and 1DM4) the biggest complaint I have with the 5DM3 is the buffer as compared to the 1DM4 when I have to bury the shutter to cover a long play. You better be pretty selective on the 5DM3 instead of just burying it with the 1DM4.
Both focusing systems are impressive but the nod has to go to the 5DM3.
I do a lot performance photography where a silent shutter is preferred. 5DM3 is the landslide winner. You can barely hear the thing! The 1DM4 silent mode is practically as loud as the regular mode. Ugh.
If you need high ISO and performance the 5DM3 is the hands down winner. 
If you need speed, power, and overall beefiness than the 1DM4 is your choice.
Luckily having both of them gives me tons of versatility.


----------



## UY66 (Apr 19, 2012)

I have & use the 5DMK2, 1DMK4 & now the 5DMK3, in General terms the 5DMK3 is the clear winner, Picture quality no better than the MK2 (but marginally better than the 1DMK4), but everything else, in particular the Auto Focus system on the newer 5DMK3 is wonderful. The areas that the 1DMK4 outdo the 5D's is in the APSH sensor, for those shots on a Telephoto where i don't quite have the Legs, the 1.3 Crop often gives me the edge i need, also in all round weather/dust proofing the 1 Series walk all over the 5D's although i understand the MK3 is improved, time will tell. But if your looking for a great semi pro camera, the 5DMK3 is it, off course it would have been nicer if it could have been delivered without the issues, light leaking top LCD, my 200 f/2 Lens locks up on the IS when attached to the MK3, Software doesn't allow RAW processing on the MK3, Once Canon wake up & solve these issues, which they will, this will be a great addition to anyones Photographic endevours.


----------



## V8Beast (Apr 19, 2012)

I think the 5DIII's buffer might be too limiting for serious sports shooting. It's fine when shooting jpegs, but fills up rather quickly in raw.


----------



## sushyam (Apr 19, 2012)

This link has a review with an observation with comments on the buffer filling up. 
http://www.drkrishi.com/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review


----------



## smirkypants (Apr 19, 2012)

This was NOT my experience. I had NO problems with the buffer filling and I was shooting long bursts shooting polo. I was using Lexar 600x cards and cannot stress enough that the buffer was not a problem. There were other problems, but the buffer wasn't oen of them.


----------



## V8Beast (Apr 19, 2012)

I suppose it depends what you consider a long burst. With a 90 mb/s CF card, my 5DIII will fire off 13-15 frames before the buffer fills up and the burst rate slows down. This is shooting raw. That said, you can practically hold the shutter down as long as you want in jpeg.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 19, 2012)

UY66 said:


> Software doesn't allow RAW processing on the MK3



Not sure what you mean by this - DPP has just been updated

Also I think you will find it difficult to notice any difference between the AF and high ISO IQ in real life. What you will notice though is the lack of AF point metering on the 5DIII, particularly in low light


----------



## smirkypants (Apr 19, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> I suppose it depends what you consider a long burst. With a 90 mb/s CF card, my 5DIII will fire off 13-15 frames before the buffer fills up and the burst rate slows down. This is shooting raw. That said, you can practically hold the shutter down as long as you want in jpeg.


I shoot nothing but RAW. If I could remove the JPG ability from the camera so I don't accidentally set it there, I would. I was shooting bursts of about 10-15 max and I shot all day for two days; maybe 5000 shots altogether. I never noticed any buffer clog. Like I said, this isn't an ideal sports camera for a lot of different reasons but I would consider the buffer issue to take a back seat to the relatively slow burst rate and the lack of a 1.3 crop factor.


----------



## Alker (Apr 19, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > I suppose it depends what you consider a long burst. With a 90 mb/s CF card, my 5DIII will fire off 13-15 frames before the buffer fills up and the burst rate slows down. This is shooting raw. That said, you can practically hold the shutter down as long as you want in jpeg.
> ...



This lack of the 1.3 crop factor is not so big as we all think.

It's 22 mp vs 16 mp.

After the 1.3 crop on the 5D mark III it will be 13 mp vs 16mp.

There may be other reasons for the mark IV , but the crop is not among them.
And remember when you are able to take a photo where focallength is no issue the IQ of the 5D will be better.
And last but not least the AF of the 5D Mark III seems better in low light.

These are my opinions, so don't shoot me over my own opinions.


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 19, 2012)

Alker said:


> This lack of the 1.3 crop factor is not so big as we all think.
> 
> It's 22 mp vs 16 mp.
> 
> ...



That is a valid point but there is more to the 1D4 than the crop for example when you hit the long end barrier of the 5DIIi. The longest a 5DIII can AF is the 600 + 1.4x = 840mm. The 1D4 does AF on the 600 + 2x + 1.3 (crop)=1560mm.

I would think there is little in the IQ between them at iso up to 12800

The other consideration might be the 1DS3 which also has f/8 AF so can manage 1200mm instead of the 840mm - and still have about the same number of pixels over the subject.


----------



## smirkypants (Apr 19, 2012)

Honestly, I chose "none of the above" and couldn't be happier.


----------



## mw (May 3, 2012)

Took a leap of faith and chose 1d mk iv over 5d mk iii. I am so very glad I did. With my 5d mk ii as my back up, it's best of both world.


----------



## smithy (May 6, 2012)

I'm building a pros comparison list of 5d III vs 1D IV, since I'm considering which to purchase...

5D Mark III:

- latest autofocus system
- smaller body size, lighter
- better high ISO performance
- better image quality
- 22 megapixels
- full frame
- better video features
- silent shutter

1D Mark IV:

- built-in battery grip
- weather proofing, build quality
- faster lens drive
- 10 fps, better buffering
- 1.3x crop gets sweet-spot for lenses and extra focal length
- f/8 autofocussing
- AF point linked metering
- cheaper (for a used copy)
- shutter good for 300,000 shots

Can anyone think of anything I've missed?


----------



## Viggo (May 6, 2012)

Just a comment. The 5d3 can keep it's max framerate for 2 seconds, the 1d4 for 3.2 seconds. Not that big of a difference really. 

The 5d3 has way slower burst rate, but if you're shooting a sequence that lasts for 2,5 seconds, you have more shots with the 1d4, but the buffer doesn't fill up on either camera.

On a sidenote, that's going to be thrashed by briansquibb :  ;Dand possibly others. I have more sharp images from a 13 images burst with the 5d than I had ever with the 1d4. So the keeperrate is higher, and buffer smaller, same difference.

The 1d X will annihilate both of the above.


----------



## smithy (May 6, 2012)

Viggo said:


> I have more sharp images from a 13 images burst with the 5d than I had ever with the 1d4. So the keeperrate is higher, and buffer smaller, same difference.
> 
> The 1d X will annihilate both of the above.


Thanks Viggo. Why do you think you get more sharp images from the 5D? Is its AF system really that much better than the 1D's?


----------



## Viggo (May 6, 2012)

smithy said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > I have more sharp images from a 13 images burst with the 5d than I had ever with the 1d4. So the keeperrate is higher, and buffer smaller, same difference.
> ...



Yes it is.

Before I couldn't use Ai on still sitting subjects as the servo would go very small steps back and forth aaall the time, but now, it locks properly and stays on, no matter if the subject is a rubberball been thrown in an elevator or a picture hanging on a wall. Hilariously much better than anything else I have tried.


----------



## smithy (May 6, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Yes it is.
> 
> Before I couldn't use Ai on still sitting subjects as the servo would go very small steps back and forth aaall the time, but now, it locks properly and stays on, no matter if the subject is a rubberball been thrown in an elevator or a picture hanging on a wall. Hilariously much better than anything else I have tried.



My dilemma is that I can buy a mint 1D IV for $800 less than a 5D III. If you were in this position, would you still pick the 5D? I know it's an awfully loaded question, but I thought I'd stick it out there...


----------



## Z (May 6, 2012)

A lot of people have said the 5D Mark III doesn't have a buffer deep enough for sports. While I don't have a 5D Mark III, I'd like to clear up some of these misconceptions. I'll use The Digital Picture as a source of reliable info - link: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx

Let's assume we're shooting raw and using the max burst rate. Using a 1D Mark IV (max RAW burst = 28 shots, 10fps), the buffer will fill up in 28/10 = 2.8 seconds. Using a 5D Mark III (max RAW burst = 18 shots, 6 fps), the buffer will fill up in 18/6 = 3 seconds. For argument's sake the 1D X buffer will fill in around 3 seconds too. How quickly you can shoot after the buffer is full depends on how quickly the buffer empties, which is in part determined by your CF card.

So to say things like:



Pixel said:


> the biggest complaint I have with the 5DM3 is the buffer as compared to the 1DM4 when I have to bury the shutter to cover a long play.



doesn't make sense. The 1D Mark IV isn't going to be able to "cover a longer play". It will get more photos _during_ that play and increase your odds of getting that perfect shot. Furthermore, Bryan Carnathan's testing (The Digital Picture) revealed that in real world testing, the 5D Mark III shot a burst of 27 RAW frames at 6fps and the 1D Mark IV shot 34 frames at 10fps before the buffer filled (both with UDMA-6 CF cards). That equates to a burst of 4.5 seconds with the 5D Mark III and only 3.4 seconds with the 1D Mark IV.

What I'm *not* arguing here is that the 5D Mark III is a better sports camera. The 1D series will always be better for capturing that perfect moment. But if you want to "bury the shutter" (sorry to pick on you, Pixel) and essentially create a 6fps movie, the 5D is probably for you. :


----------



## bycostello (May 6, 2012)

5 series.. weddings
1 series sport and journalism

apples and oranges really


----------



## smithy (May 6, 2012)

bycostello said:


> 5 series.. weddings
> 1 series sport and journalism
> 
> apples and oranges really


What do you think it is about these cameras that makes them better for either weddings or journalism? One of Canon's marketing strategies for the 1D IV was showing how good it was for wedding photography, so I'm just curious.

This is the marketing I was referring to:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/jeff_ascough_blog.do


----------



## WarStreet (May 6, 2012)

Using a 90mb extreme pro Sandisk CF card, and shooting raw, with a minimum of 1/500 shutter, wide open, fully charged battery, and good exposure to reach the maximum continuous shooting speed of 6fps, I manage to get between 18 - 23 shots. This is about 3 to 3.8 seconds of shooting and it was achieved even with ISO 800 (which increases the file size). It takes about 4-5 seconds to clear the buffer when full (didn't time it with a watch, just mental estimate  ) 

When I was reading about the 1DIV tests with the same card, looks it manage to get about 25 - 30 shots which translates to 2.5 to 3 seconds. From the specs, it seems that even the 1DX won' t manage to do better than that due to it's fast 12fps. 

It was interesting to read the digital picture reviewer saying that he used to prefer shooting sports with the 1DsIII with it's slow 5fps instead the 1DIV, so that he get more background blur due to the sensor size difference. This was one of the main reasons I wanted to switch to FF for sports. Now, the 5DIII can give a 6fps with the best AF and and great FF sensor. It is also interesting to hear that the new 5DIII AF has better odds to get the photos in focus compared to the 1DIV.

I want to add that I am noticing that when the 5DIII battery is below 40-50%, the continuous shooting speed sounds to be about 4fps. It made me think about the battery grip rumor saying that the camera could achieve 6.9 fps with it. Anyone noticed the same fps decline ?


----------



## altenae (May 6, 2012)

WarStreet said:


> Using a 90mb extreme pro Sandisk CF card, and shooting raw, with a minimum of 1/500 shutter, wide open, fully charged battery, and good exposure to reach the maximum continuous shooting speed of 6fps, I manage to get between 18 - 23 shots. This is about 3 to 3.8 seconds of shooting and it was achieved even with ISO 800 (which increases the file size). It takes about 4-5 seconds to clear the buffer when full (didn't time it with a watch, just mental estimate  )
> 
> When I was reading about the 1DIV tests with the same card, looks it manage to get about 25 - 30 shots which translates to 2.5 to 3 seconds. From the specs, it seems that even the 1DX won' t manage to do better than that due to it's fast 12fps.
> 
> ...



Yep same here with the battery power below 40%.
You are also right about the 5D Mark III buffer, same numbers here.
The clearing of the 5D mark III buffer seems faster then the 1D Mark IV.

But it seems I can't get an OOF image with the 5D mark III.... 
Brilliant AF system....

The 1Dx must be even better....


----------



## herbert (May 6, 2012)

Here is another difference not yet mentioned:



> Lens drive speed: Because of its higher voltage battery, the 1D Mark IV can supply an initial burst of power to select L-series USM telephoto lenses (limited to EF super telephotos) that drives them twice as fast as normal for the first second of operation. The 5D Mark III can't do that because its battery is lower voltage, and also because the camera body is not designed to accept higher voltage even if it was available.



http://www.ronmartblog.com/2012/03/canon-5d-mark-iii-unboxing-first-report.html

This is only from specification. I do not know if the difference is noticeable in the real world. I own neither camera but I am currently doing a lot of reading about the potential upgrades for my 7D which from my perspective is limited when used for distant nature photography in low light.


----------



## Z (May 6, 2012)

herbert said:


> Here is another difference not yet mentioned:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've briefly tried looking for a list of the lenses that applies to, but haven't found a definitive answer. I don't own any super teles so it would seem like a non-issue for me. For the pro sports photographers it's a no-brainer.


----------



## WarStreet (May 6, 2012)

herbert said:


> Here is another difference not yet mentioned:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The reviewer of the digital picture, used the 5DIII for sports with 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 lenses and says that the focus hit rate was impressive. This guy has good experience with the 1 series cameras so I am sure he knows what he is talking about.


----------



## herbert (May 6, 2012)

WarStreet said:


> The reviewer of the digital picture, used the 5DIII for sports with 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 lenses and says that the focus hit rate was impressive. This guy has good experience with the 1 series cameras so I am sure he knows what he is talking about.



I also remember him saying that the hit rate for the 300/400 f2.8 mark II was less than for the mark I when he reviewed the new 300 and 400 lenses. This was with the older 1-series bodies (1Ds3/1D4) since the 5D3 was not out at the time. He did speculate that the 1Dx might be the solution to this issue.

If he tested the 5D3 mainly with the new super telephoto lenses (and it makes sense to do so) then the new focus system on the 5D3, and 1Dx, could be better in this case due to the co-development of the lens and body to be a perfect match. The lenses do have chips inside for focus control.

So if you are planning on buying a new super telephoto too then the line between the 1D4 and 5D3 is more blurred.


----------



## altenae (May 6, 2012)

Even Arthur Morris (Also wildlife photographer) says:
As regular readers know I feel that the new autofocus system in the 5D III is the best ever in any Canon camera body. I make a higher percentage of sharp flight images than ever before and I love the various AF Area Selections modes
My BIF in focus has improved with the NEW 5D Mark III AF.


And I also agree. 

-----
www.wildlife-photos.net
www.planepix.nl


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 6, 2012)

smithy said:


> My dilemma is that I can buy a mint 1D IV for $800 less than a 5D III. If you were in this position, would you still pick the 5D? I know it's an awfully loaded question, but I thought I'd stick it out there...


 
No dilema, jump on the 1D MK IV. A mint one with low shutter count will push $4,000 normally, so you could resell it if you change your mind for a $1200 profit.


----------



## briansquibb (May 6, 2012)

I think have discussed at length why there is a higher percentage of keepers with the 5DIII

IIRC:

- 6fps gives the shooter more time to do minor adjustments, whereas at 10fps the take rate doesn't let that happen.

- the total number of keepers was higher for the 1D4, except of course the percentage was lower

- you are more likely to miss the shot at 6fps than at 10fps

There is always going to be exceptions - but I feel in general the 1D4 will win hands down, I just dont get any missed shots with my shooting whose subjects are not exceptionaly fast moving(except the ones where I wander off subject). Yesterday I was shooting street dancing without issue. 

There is little difference in IQ at high ISO

There is one thing that was missed - and to me very important - 

- The ability to shoot manual mode with ec which is not possible with the 5DIII


----------



## altenae (May 6, 2012)

> - 6fps gives the shooter more time to do minor adjustments, whereas at 10fps the take rate doesn't let that happen.



You mean the camera can do minor adjustments ?
I am not able to do any adjustments while shooting 6fps in one second. I am not that fast. 

Maybe it's personal, but I trust the AF more on the 5D mark III. 
Just my feeling, not necessary a fact.


----------



## briansquibb (May 6, 2012)

altenae said:


> > - 6fps gives the shooter more time to do minor adjustments, whereas at 10fps the take rate doesn't let that happen.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Panning at 6fps is easier than at 10fps for example. I believe the AF on both the 5D3 and the 1D4 are good.

Yesterday I was shooting street dancing. I did one sequence of 82 shots on the 1D4 all in were in focus. That is good enough for me to say that it is pretty good. I cannot not say the 5D3 would have got a better sequence.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

The 1D4 also has the ability to meter on any 8 chosen af points - rather useful for disconnected light patterns


----------



## smithy (May 7, 2012)

Updated my list, adding cons...

5D Mark III:
Pros:
- latest autofocus system
- smaller body size, lighter
- better high ISO performance
- better image quality
- 22 megapixels
- full frame
- better video features
- silent shutter

Cons:
- battery grip costs an extra $400 and looks ugly
- achieves 6fps only when battery is over 40-50% full

1D Mark IV:
Pros:
- built-in battery grip
- weather proofing, build quality
- faster lens drive
- 10 fps, better buffering
- 1.3x crop gets sweet-spot for lenses and extra focal length
- f/8 autofocussing
- AF point linked metering
- a lot cheaper (for a used copy)
- shutter good for 300,000 shots
- amazing battery life

Cons:
- dodgy flash performance
- silent shutter isn't very silent


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

smithy said:


> Updated my list, adding cons...
> 
> 5D Mark III:
> Pros:
> ...



Dodgy flash performance???? Never heard of that nor experienced - and you are aware that I am flash fanatic : : :

You left of the selectable AF point metering - VERY usefull for weddings


----------



## smithy (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> There is one thing that was missed - and to me very important -
> 
> - The ability to shoot manual mode with ec which is not possible with the 5DIII


Is ec exposure compensation?


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

smithy said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > There is one thing that was missed - and to me very important -
> ...



Yes it is - I shoot all the time in this mode - set the shutterspeed and the aperture and the auto iso sets itself. I then have exposure compensation to fine tune with


----------



## smithy (May 7, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Dodgy flash performance???? Never heard of that nor experienced - and you are aware that I am flash fanatic : : :
> 
> You left of the selectable AF point metering - VERY usefull for weddings


I thought I had the metering bit covered with "AF point linked metering". Have I got it wrong?

After re-reading some articles, it seems that the dodgy flash performance is related to using the AF-assist beam from external flashes. It's very slow to get focus in this mode, compared with the 5D series cameras (of all generations).

Now that I'm really getting into the nitty gritty of what I like and dislike about these cameras, one thing is becoming obvious - I don't like the physical look of the 5D Mark III, nor do I like its top rotary dial. I can't stand the way the camera looks with the battery grip attached! And I need a battery grip. Does this make me shallow?


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

smithy said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Dodgy flash performance???? Never heard of that nor experienced - and you are aware that I am flash fanatic : : :
> ...



Not noticed an issue with AF using flash - and I take a lot of theatre shots.

There are two sepearate things about the metering

- it will always use the AF focus point for metering
- second mode 
- Aim the spot metering circle over the area where you want a
relative exposure reading, then press the <I> button.
- On the right of the viewfinder, the relative exposure level will be
displayed for the spot meter reading taken. For the exposure, the
average of the spot meter readings will be set.

I like gripped as I take a lot of portrait orientation shots


----------



## smithy (May 7, 2012)

Yes, having the built in grip would be very useful. Sometimes I'll be wearing a suit when I'm taking photographs, and it's bad to extend my arms over the top of the camera when shooting portrait without a grip. Suit jackets aren't designed to stretch like that.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

smithy said:


> Yes, having the built in grip would be very useful. Sometimes I'll be wearing a suit when I'm taking photographs, and it's bad to extend my arms over the top of the camera when shooting portrait without a grip. Suit jackets aren't designed to stretch like that.



The beauty of the 1d4 grip is that changing AF point is easily to hand.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 7, 2012)

smithy said:


> After re-reading some articles, it seems that the dodgy flash performance is related to using the AF-assist beam from external flashes. It's very slow to get focus in this mode, compared with the 5D series cameras (of all generations).


 
I've read that the weakness of the 1D MK IV, if there is one, is low light AF in general. I did not think its associated with the use of AF Assist.

Am I wrong on this?

I'm looking at getting one if I can negotiate the price down. I've downloaded raw images at high ISO and decided that its close enough to my old 5D MK II at ISO 6400 that its not a issue. My 7D would then be sold.


----------



## briansquibb (May 7, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> smithy said:
> 
> 
> > After re-reading some articles, it seems that the dodgy flash performance is related to using the AF-assist beam from external flashes. It's very slow to get focus in this mode, compared with the 5D series cameras (of all generations).
> ...



I would say that the 5DII was better at low light AF than the 1D4

I can give you RAW images if you want at iso up to 12800


----------

