Upgrade to 1Ds MarkIII or buy a new lens?

Hi, I have just put my 1D Mark III for sale.. The idea was to get a used 1ds mark iii, but I am increasingly tempted by the idea of keeping the camera and getting a new lens (looking at the 100 macro), OR replacing the 1d Mark III with a 5d Mark II and getting the 100 macro.

So yeah, the idea is that I would like to move to a full frame, but I also don't know if it's a good idea to get a body now, since there are rumours about 1D Mark V and a 5D Mark III coming out June/July-ish. I have entertained the idea of patiently waiting until July after selling my camera.. That would mean I won't be able to take pictures for about three months.. or could I get a provisional 40D????

I know this all sounds rambly and crazy. What do you guys think?? I'm absolutely torn.

Okay, to lay out the options:

1) Sell 1D Mark III, buy IDs Mark III
2) Sell 1D Mark III, buy 5D Mark II and 100 Macro
3) Sell 1D Mark III, buy 40D and 100 Macro and wait
4) Sell 1D Mark III and patiently wait
5) Dont' sell and just buy a 100 Macro

If you taking macro/portrait/landsca​pe-shots, then:

option 2

But maybe you'll miss the fast AF of the 1D Mk III.

And i don't think, that a 1D Mk V will be released before the 1Ds Mk IV. Even for this camera Canon hasn't announced a date or anything like that.

Cheers
flop

It depends on what lenses you have now and what you plan on shooting?

Take Care,
Cheers, Patrick

you reckon? I've been going off what's been recently said on canonrumors.com
I think option 2 makes a lot of sense, but i'm worried I would miss the features that i've grown to like on the 1d...

Saint728 wrote in post #12122026
It depends on what lenses you have now and what you plan on shooting?

Take Care,
Cheers, Patrick

Well i'm in a bit of a weird situation.. my 1D Mark III was my first DSLR - i got it as a present. I got a 50m F/1.4 and don't have any other lenses. I was thinking I shouldn't really invest in anything more before i get used to the camera and 'train' myself with a prime lens. I live in nyc and just take pictures of whatever there is... i was considering the 100 macro because i wanted to take more portraits and macro pictures.

perhaps it's just the wrong time for me to invest more, period. :-/

thankssssss

I would probably go with option #5. Just get use to your 1D Mark III and buy a 100mm macro lens. If you later feel the need for a FF then buy the 5D Mark II or 1Ds Mark III.

Take Care,
Cheers, Patrick

Just another opinion but the move from APS-H to FF isn't as dramatic as you might think.

Focal lengths still play pretty true on a MkIII or MkIV Vs a 1DsMkIII. Very different than say 7D to 1DsMkIII

i agree that option 5 is the most rational..
i think the temptation mainly stems from my newbness and it's hard to resist :'(

Personally I would go with option 2. IMO the 5D2 is as much of the 1Ds3 as I need and in a more compact package and a bit more due to video, etc.

That being said, what Im not understanding about your options is if you are okay with dropping around $7k on the 1Ds3 why is the 5D2 + 100 macro route only about $3k? If I were okay with dropping $7k on a body alone (thats about to be replaced with the upgrade) Id be willing to also consider dropping all that money on the 5D2, 100 macro, AND a bunch other other stuff! Like maybe the MT-24EX twin light flash? More lenses? etc. THAT I think would be a far better use of the money.

Lenses... get more. It will be like upgrading your camera

ben_r_ wrote in post #12124877
Personally I would go with option 2. IMO the 5D2 is as much of the 1Ds3 as I need and in a more compact package and a bit more due to video, etc.

That being said, what Im not understanding about your options is if you are okay with dropping around $7k on the 1Ds3 why is the 5D2 + 100 macro route only about $3k? If I were okay with dropping $7k on a body alone (thats about to be replaced with the upgrade) Id be willing to also consider dropping all that money on the 5D2, 100 macro, AND a bunch other other stuff! Like maybe the MT-24EX twin light flash? More lenses? etc. THAT I think would be a far better use of the money.

I'm looking at used ones all around.. I guess i'm willing to drop around $4000...
I couldn't care less about video - i never use it.
I also liked the sturdy build of the 1D, it was awesome especially because i slip and fall a lot :'(
i frankly didn't mind that it's half my size.
i'm worried i'd ruin any less sturdy body in a second..

Would replacing the 1D Mk iii with a 1Ds Mk ii be a bad idea?
that way i could still get the 100 Macro..

gingerbeer wrote in post #12126751
Would replacing the 1D Mk iii with a 1Ds Mk ii be a bad idea?
that way i could still get the 100 Macro..

I don't think it's a bad idea. Pretty much the contrary I'd say. The 1Ds Mark II is an awesome cam, having the AF and "tankness" of the 1D Mark III + the full frame sensor. Even if the sensor is a tad older generation, it should be still very decent. I'm pretty sure the 100 macro and 1Ds2 could be a killer

Latest software can really take the best out of our cameras in terms of noise, at the point I even got printed in a newspaper and big promotional print a picture taken at 1600 ISO on my 1D2 (1600 beeing its maximum ISO if we except the H level).

TopGun31 wrote in post #12126815
I don't think it's a bad idea. Pretty much the contrary I'd say. The 1Ds Mark II is an awesome cam, having the AF and "tankness" of the 1D Mark III + the full frame sensor. Even if the sensor is a tad older generation, it should be still very decent. I'm pretty sure the 100 macro and 1Ds2 could be a killer

Latest software can really take the best out of our cameras in terms of noise, at the point I even got printed in a newspaper and big promotional print a picture taken at 1600 ISO on my 1D2 (1600 beeing its maximum ISO if we except the H level).

thanks! i'm leaning towards this.. but im wayyyy too impulsive for my own good so god knows.

do you have any other lens recommendation? right now i just have one - the 50/F1.4. I'm hesitant to buy a new one cause i feel like im not even properly using that one lens i have :-/

If you only have the 50 f1/4 it's already not bad, it actually all depends on what type of shootings you do. I've added a 17-40L to my combo and it's fantastic : very nice workaround lens (L quality at low price) on a crop sensor, and an excellent wide angle - mid range on the full frame.

Otherwise you can also consider the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, many people use it on the 1D Mark II (check the last pages of the dedicated thread), I found it surprisingly good and it's a LOT cheaper than the Canon 24-70.

On my side I use a simple and cheap 28-105 USM II, does the job very well despite the narrow apertures.