5dmk2 vs 1dmk3

So I am diving full on into photography again as a profession and am looking to upgrade my 30D and am trying to decide between the 5Dmk2 and the 1Dmk3 I will be doing mostly portrait , event , and commercial work if I was doing sports the 1Dmk3 would be a no brainer but not needing the frame rate I find myself in a dilemma and looking for opinions and advice if anyone owns or has used both you input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Damian75 wrote in post #7095297
So I am diving full on into photography again as a profession

Oh boy; your going to get flamed; but anyways.

The 5dMKII suits your much better than what the 1D does.

twofruitz wrote in post #7095306
Oh boy; your going to get flamed; but anyways.

Why do you say that I was a photographer for 10 years mostly wedding and event and got fed up with dealing with the wedding part I was all RB and RZ's then and a serious darkroom person I have taken the time to become solid with my PP with digital imaging and being in a position in my life were I can go back to work for myself I am looking for some input from those who have experience with the two models I am looking at if it was in my budget I would just buy a Leaf back for my RZ but I could by 10 1Dmk3's for that.

I have a MKIII and have never used a 5D, but I recognize the experience of others and since they have said that the resolution, ISO, and features like movies, etc are very good on the new 5D, you should get the 5D for general areas you mention. I would tend that way myself if I were shooting those kinds of events.

I do more sports shooting like football and hockey with periodic portraits, and the MKIII is great for these needs.

5d is would say is better suited in many ways IMO

The only think you might want to think about is the dual card slots on a 1d so that as a pro you'll never loose an image in the event of a card failure.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #7095399
I have a MKIII and have never used a 5D, but I recognize the experience of others and since they have said that the resolution, ISO, and features like movies, etc are very good on the new 5D, you should get the 5D for general areas you mention. I would tend that way myself if I were shooting those kinds of events.

I do more sports shooting like football and hockey with periodic portraits, and the MKIII is great for these needs.

Thanks for the input if I was shooting sports I would get the Mk3 without a second thought I think my hesitation with the 5D is that I have owned 1 series bodies just not digital still have a 1V and know the build quality so I think that is what brought the Mk3 into my decision making.

I'd strongly suggest that you try both but my feeling is that the 1Dmk3 is the better choice. I've got both cameras and for the work you say you will be doing the speed and accuracy of the 1D plus the long battery life, dual card slots etc will be a lot better. If you had the 5D you'd still do a great job though

5D2 hands down. Most of the features that the 1DMK3 has over the 5D you would probably never use anyway.

A few of people that were waiting for a 5D mk2 once it was released went with a 1D MK3, but I do think the 5D MK2 will give you a better image in general, but it is swings and roundabouts, I would have a tendency to wait a little or pick up an old 5D, there are feelings the next batch of 1 series bodies are going to pretty big upgrades

upgrade to the price i bet....

I am in the same situation as you OP, you should look at here

Damian75 wrote in post #7095297
So I am diving full on into photography again as a profession and am looking to upgrade my 30D and am trying to decide between the 5Dmk2 and the 1Dmk3 I will be doing mostly portrait , event , and commercial work if I was doing sports the 1Dmk3 would be a no brainer but not needing the frame rate I find myself in a dilemma and looking for opinions and advice if anyone owns or has used both you input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

don't just look at the 1d mark III as "frame rate". it produces some mind boggling images. i have the 1d and the 1ds,

the biggest difference here for what you are shooting is file size, and the FF camera may be the better choice for you.

ed rader

There is something about the 1Dmk3 images. 5Dmk2 has loads of pixels and sharp ones at that but there is something magical about the 1D's pictures.

I was in the same boat as well, having just gotten a 5DII. I did briefly have a 1DIII, and in terms of handling/speed, build and AF it is a better camera than the 5DII. Both have excellent high ISO performance.

That being said, it seems the 5DII would be better for your intended usage. However, I still feel the 1DIII is a better camera overall. Bottom line is you can't go wrong with either!

If commercial work would include architectural I would go with the 5D, FF has an advantage over the crop on the 1DIII. My first digital was a 1.3 crop and I hated it for that reason. You could get by with a 24-70 or 24-105 for most things. If you use a crop body you might find the need for a wider lens. You might be better served with a 24 TS-E instead of a 17-40 or a 16-35 for that type of work. Thats what I did anyway, I still want a 16-35 but I don't really need it.