Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 29 May 2011 (Sunday) 13:04
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1D IIn to III - worthwhile upgrade?

 
Erik_L
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
May 29, 2011 13:04 |  #1

I currently use my 1D IIn as my go-to camera for crappy conditions or when I just feel like I want to use something beefier. I love the handling of the 1D compared to the 5D, without question.

I've gotten some pretty acceptable shots out of the 1D IIn at ISO 1600, but they're not good... enough. would the III have a full stop (or more) advantage over the IIn in terms of high ISO? I checked out DXomark and it looks like it's only a few "points" higher, but so is the 1D IV, and the 5D II still outperformed the 1D IV according to their numbers.

In real life situations, is the higher ISO performance, and the ISO 400-800 performance appreciably more noise-free on the III vs the II? Other things don't matter too much, though I do notice that my IIn will occasionally miss one-shot AF, but typically nails it in AI-Servo for tracking.

If nothing else, 14-bit alone is tempting since I can push 5D II files about 3 stops without much trouble :)


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TaDa
...as cool as Perry
Avatar
6,742 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: New York
     
May 29, 2011 13:33 |  #2

I had a mark 2, not 2n, but same sensor. The 3 is a stop or so cleaner. I never had any concern shooting at 1600 or 3200. I adored my 1d3 and still miss it. I definitely think that the 3 is a worthwhile upgrade to the 2


Name is Peter and here is my gear:
Canon 5D II, Canon 7D, Canon 40D
Glass - Zeiss 21 f/2.8 ZE, Canon 35 f/1.4L, Canon 40 f/2.8 STM, Canon 24-70 f/2.8
L, Canon 85 f/1.2L II, Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 500 f/4L IS
Speedlite 580ex II, 430ex - Gitzo GT-3541XLS w/ Arca B1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik_L
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
May 29, 2011 13:42 |  #3

:) "like"


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GAELICSTORM7
Goldmember
Avatar
1,042 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2005
     
May 29, 2011 14:21 as a reply to  @ Erik_L's post |  #4

Hi there,

I had a 1D mkii up to a few weeks ago then managed to upgrade to a 1D mkiii and have to say I find it a HUGE leap forward, autofocus seems much quicker and seems to follow objects better, noise is much better controlled. the camera is lighter (battery is MUCH smaller and lighter than in the mkii), the screen is a delight to use and actually seems to give a good idea if images are sharp (something that I always found the 1Dmkii unable to do).

the mkii was a great camera the mkiii is a superb one.

Alan


Canon 1D mark III, Canon 20D, Canon 300D IR modded, Canon G12, Canon EF 17-40 f/4L USM, Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, Canon EF 70-200 f/4L USM, Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM, Canon 1.4x converter, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM macro, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, Peleng 8mm, Canon 580EX, Sigma EM-140DG

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sp1207
Goldmember
1,835 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Right Behind You
     
May 29, 2011 16:58 |  #5

Theoretically it's only a fraction of a stop cleaner (sensor improvement wise), but that's OK.

Realize that between the original 1D and 1DIV sensors have only gotten better by about 3DB (approximately a stop), ignoring megapixel gains (significant, but not really between the 1DII and III). It's the processing software (including what's on camera) that's so much better. Think 12+ DB between photoshop then and now.

If you're not using Lightroom 3 (CS5) for noise reduction, consider it. It's quite amazing how powerful the new NR engine is. That's not to say the 1DIII isn't better -- it definitely is (clears buffer faster, usable screen, more megapickels and FPS, better AF, live view, AF MA), but if noise is the reason you're unhappy with your camera then that's probably not a good reason to upgrade.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik_L
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
May 31, 2011 09:19 |  #6

I am using Lr3 - sharpening and NR are LEAGUES ahead of Lr2. I too don't like that it's very difficult to judge sharpness on the 1D IIn - but it's always a nice surprise when I get 'em on the PC and they're good n' clean :)

I'll save my pennies and likely jump to the 1D III, though the Sigma 20 f/1.8 is screaming my name....


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik_L
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
May 31, 2011 09:28 |  #7

Also, does the III still produce the "film-like" images that i've come to love from the 1D and 1D II?


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,182 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5929
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
May 31, 2011 11:06 |  #8

Here is my high ISO comparison between the 1D3 and 1D4, it will give you some high ISO crops from the 1D3 to check out.

https://photography-on-the.net …105&highlight=m​ini-review


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik_L
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
May 31, 2011 14:21 |  #9

Thanks for the info - quite surprising. I think I need to work on reading my historgram or something because I can't get that good of result using my 5D II sometimes..... I shoot RAW, but often find myself pushing every photo a bit, I typically shoot Av w/ + 1/3 EV (or more, depending on the situation).

Anyway, does the 1D III get more "digital" feeling than the older generation 1D bodies? I think the old 1D classic had an amazing look to the TIFFs it produced.


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sp1207
Goldmember
1,835 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Right Behind You
     
May 31, 2011 15:44 |  #10

Part of that has to do with the 5DII's A/D circuitry. It just isn't up to the same level as the 1D series, so the shadow noise gets rather obnoxious.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
Avatar
8,565 posts
Likes: 696
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Alberta, CANADA
     
May 31, 2011 16:47 |  #11

Erik_L wrote in post #12510540 (external link)
Thanks for the info - quite surprising. I think I need to work on reading my historgram or something because I can't get that good of result using my 5D II sometimes..... I shoot RAW, but often find myself pushing every photo a bit, I typically shoot Av w/ + 1/3 EV (or more, depending on the situation).

Anyway, does the 1D III get more "digital" feeling than the older generation 1D bodies? I think the old 1D classic had an amazing look to the TIFFs it produced.

The 1D3 is one of the last Canon bodies before they started chasing ridiculous high ISO values. The low ISO is beautiful. Absolutely beautiful. I MUCH MUCH MUCH preferred the files out of my 1D3 over my 5D. Details were crisp, shadows were very nice and clean. Colours are good too. The files can take quite a beating. Starting with the 5D2, all the subsequent canon bodies were optimized for high ISO rather than low/mid ISO. The high ISO was definitely better, but it came at the expense of LOW ISO. I've been really turned off by the low ISO files (i.e. ISO800 and lower, especially ISO100) of the new cameras. The change was quite evident comparing the 1Ds mark III and the 5D2. Both share the same sensor, but the 1Ds3 does beautiful, clean, detailed low ISO which the 5D2 cannot hope to match, and the 5D2 does high ISO that's only a pipe dream for the 1Ds3.

So in my useless opinion, it's the new batch of cameras have that "digital" look to it, if you can call it that. The RAW files cannot take nearly the beating the old cams could. You could push a totally black 1Ds3 ISO100 file 7 stops and still find details in there to create a printable picture. I know because I've done it, due to my studio lights not firing at a good moment.

I fear that the 1Ds mark IV may also go down the high ISO road. It would kill it for me, IMO. The 1Ds mark III was the first 35mm DSLR that made the medium format shooters take note and consider it as potential competition. If the 1Ds line loses the clean, detailed low ISO, it will no longer be a viable commercial photography platform.

The 1D3 and 1Ds3 brothers are amazing in terms of RAW file quality and depth, though they are lagging a bit behind in the noise category.


-Lloyd
The BOUDOIR - Edmonton Intimate Boudoir Photography (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Studio Family Baby Child Maternity Wedding Photographers (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Headshot Photographers (external link)
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) |Instagram (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik_L
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,160 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
Jun 05, 2011 11:30 |  #12

picturecrazy wrote in post #12511300 (external link)
The 1D3 is one of the last Canon bodies before they started chasing ridiculous high ISO values. The low ISO is beautiful. Absolutely beautiful. I MUCH MUCH MUCH preferred the files out of my 1D3 over my 5D. Details were crisp, shadows were very nice and clean. Colours are good too. The files can take quite a beating. Starting with the 5D2, all the subsequent canon bodies were optimized for high ISO rather than low/mid ISO. The high ISO was definitely better, but it came at the expense of LOW ISO. I've been really turned off by the low ISO files (i.e. ISO800 and lower, especially ISO100) of the new cameras. The change was quite evident comparing the 1Ds mark III and the 5D2. Both share the same sensor, but the 1Ds3 does beautiful, clean, detailed low ISO which the 5D2 cannot hope to match, and the 5D2 does high ISO that's only a pipe dream for the 1Ds3.

So in my useless opinion, it's the new batch of cameras have that "digital" look to it, if you can call it that. The RAW files cannot take nearly the beating the old cams could. You could push a totally black 1Ds3 ISO100 file 7 stops and still find details in there to create a printable picture. I know because I've done it, due to my studio lights not firing at a good moment.

I fear that the 1Ds mark IV may also go down the high ISO road. It would kill it for me, IMO. The 1Ds mark III was the first 35mm DSLR that made the medium format shooters take note and consider it as potential competition. If the 1Ds line loses the clean, detailed low ISO, it will no longer be a viable commercial photography platform.

The 1D3 and 1Ds3 brothers are amazing in terms of RAW file quality and depth, though they are lagging a bit behind in the noise category.

Damn you. bw! I've pushed some 5DII ISO 100 RAWs 3 stops with no problem, not even sure how I'd push it 7 :)

I'm now pursuinga 1D III even harder :}


Canon EOS 1D III
Manfrotto 190X Pro B w/324RC2 "Action Head" | Canon 580EX II
Sigma 20 f/1.8 | Canon 35 f/1.4 L | Sigma 50 f/1.4 | Sigma 85 f/1.4 | Canon 135 f/2 L
Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SaxonIV
Senior Member
Avatar
768 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Alabama
     
Jun 05, 2011 12:11 |  #13

picturecrazy wrote in post #12511300 (external link)
If the 1Ds line loses the clean, detailed low ISO, it will no longer be a viable commercial photography platform.

This one made me laugh a little inside. From what you say, a 5D MkII is not a "viable commercial photography platform." I'm sure there are thousands of journalists and photographers out there that will disagree.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Jun 05, 2011 12:17 |  #14

I own and use both. The III is an upgrade. There is a difference in the noise when you do get it, with e III being easier to clean up. I do not know why but there seems to be less color noise, especially if you compare max ISO from both bodies in a properly exposed shot.

In AF terms the III is better but you have more control, so you will go up a learning curve to set it.

MA is also a benefit.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Framed ­ Life
Goldmember
Avatar
1,054 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
     
Jun 05, 2011 12:28 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

This thread surprises me, I was recently given advice by someone who I highly respect in photography that the 1DIIn and the 1DIV are the best sports cameras from Canon to date, and I should skip the 1D III.


The Framed Life (external link)
Canon 30D
70-200mm F/4L, 24-70 f/2.8L

►►► 30D For Sale ◄◄◄
James Robertson

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,454 views & 0 likes for this thread
1D IIn to III - worthwhile upgrade?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Edenfieldr
940 guests, 369 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.