In the current market 1dsMKII vs 1DMKIII

I know this has been asked before and I have searched the threads and most are pretty old so here is my question. I am looking to upgrade my 30D which I bought just to get my feet wet in digital I still do most of my shooting on an RZ67 and hand develop and print. I mostly shoot portraits and landscapes and am looking to move completely to digital and MF is out of the budget. So in the current landscape the 1dsmkII and the 1dmkIII are selling used for very close to the same price so my question, does the FF and higher MP negate the 14bit processing and newer sensor and other features such as sensor cleaning, micro adjust ect. I am not really interested in high iso in fact I am more excited that it will go down to 50. So I would really like to hear from those with experience with both is the extra 6.7 MP and full frame make the 1dsmkII the winner or do the newer features and processing give the edge to the MKIII. Also just FYI most of my printing will be 11x14 and 8x10.

For what and how you shoot, I think you would benefit more from the 1Ds2. It's a fantastic camera that pumps out great looking images. All of the new bells and whistles of the 1D3 are nice, but for pure image quality, I still use my 5D.

1Ds2

Both great cams. I use them for different types of image. Sports and wildlife etc., I tend to grab the MkIII - Landscapes, portraits etc the 1Ds2.

Both produce excellent quality images.

Seems like the 1Ds2 would suit your type of work better.

Thanks everyone for the quick replies I was leaning to the 1dsmkII for the FF then the techie in me started looking at the MKIII.

The ONLY negative to me of the 1Ds2 is the need for firewire. None of my computers have firewire, and the personal settings on the 1Ds2 have to be configured via firewire. In the 1D3 line, they moved all of those to custom functions that can be configured in camera.

TaDa wrote in post #9390693
The ONLY negative to me of the 1Ds2 is the need for firewire. None of my computers have firewire, and the personal settings on the 1Ds2 have to be configured via firewire. In the 1D3 line, they moved all of those to custom functions that can be configured in camera.

It's funny you mention that, the 1dsmkII being firewire was a plus for me I run an all Mac shop so plenty of firewire and I don't trust USB for anything other than mice and keyboards.

Then you'll LOVE it you tree-hugging hippie

TaDa wrote in post #9390734
Then you'll LOVE it you tree-hugging hippie

I work in IT

B&Wlover wrote in post #9390439
I mostly shoot portraits and landscapes and am looking to move completely to digital and MF is out of the budget. Also just FYI most of my printing will be 11x14 and 8x10.

You should be looking at the 1Ds Mark II, 5D II, or 1Ds Mark III. If we don't consider a difference in image quality then your looking at AF and LiveView as the main differences. I am sure you know things we don't that will help you decide from there.

TaDa wrote in post #9390693
The ONLY negative to me of the 1Ds2 is the need for firewire. None of my computers have firewire, and the personal settings on the 1Ds2 have to be configured via firewire. In the 1D3 line, they moved all of those to custom functions that can be configured in camera.

This really frustrated me recently when I wanted to do tethered shooting. It was harder than I thought tracking down the right cable to connect to my new laptop.

d.

Just something to note: No Canon cameras have iso 50. It is just iso 100 overexposed, so you lose your highlight headroom.

While the 1dmkIII has some really cool new features like microadjust but I think the image quality of the 1dsmkII outweighs the new toys.