Regretting buying 1Dmk3

Hi,

Has anyone purchase a 1D mk3 and having second thoughts about having a 1dmk4? What is your reason why?

Would you buy 1dmk3 or 1dmk4? I am hearing all the good things about 1D series.

For most of the people I've talked to who own either of the cameras, the crop factor is a big part of it. 1Ds is geared more for sports with the 1.3x crop. Landscape photogs generally prefer FF to get the most of the wide lenses, etc..

You buy one or the other depending on what you need, I suppose.

^ There is no mention of the 1Ds FF in this topic...

I will just say one thing, having had 2 1D3s and my current 1D4, the 1D4 is not worth over twice the 1D3 on the used market, so keep that in mind.

I would love a 1D4 but can't come close to justifying the price tag. The 1D3 is a great deal right now on the used market and even though mine's at Canon I have no regrets. I am going crazy not having it. My trusty old 40D is going strong though.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12466764
^ There is no mention of the 1Ds FF in this topic..

Yes, I retract my previous post. Don't know how I missed the lack of an s (not being sarcastic).

As others have commented, the 1D3 is a bargain. I found it was a very versatile camera. To me, its biggest failings were limited resolution (limits my ability to crop an image) and the the screen quality (which limited how accurately I could manually focus it. The 1D4 fixed both issues. I find the noise performance is fairly similar.

To digress a little, I recall seeing a post that compared the performance of the 7D and the 1D3... there was very little in it. The increased resolution of the 7D was largely offset by increased noise. To my mind, the 1D3's primary attraction in this comparison would be build quality, dual card recording and battery life.

What's your budget total for gear? I bought the Mark IV and love it, but if you can't buy good lens to go with it then stick the the Mark III and use the other $2500 to buy a couple good lens. The body is second to the glass ... Buy glass first then a used body with left over cash if budget is an issue.

noisejammer wrote in post #12467363
As others have commented, the 1D3 is a bargain. I found it was a very versatile camera. To me, its biggest failings were limited resolution (limits my ability to crop an image) and the the screen quality (which limited how accurately I could manually focus it. The 1D4 fixed both issues. I find the noise performance is fairly similar.

To digress a little, I recall seeing a post that compared the performance of the 7D and the 1D3... there was very little in it. The increased resolution of the 7D was largely offset by increased noise. To my mind, the 1D3's primary attraction in this comparison would be build quality, dual card recording and battery life.

From reading other people opinions, 1d mk4 has higher usable iso setting. Have you personally view the difference between 1d mk3 and mk4 in low light shooting?

Yeah, shooting 12mp on the 1Dmark4 (instead of full resolution) and comparing it to the 1Dmark3, you can see a drastic improvement especially once your ISO hits four digits.

chenga732 wrote in post #12469275
From reading other people opinions, 1d mk4 has higher usable iso setting. Have you personally view the difference between 1d mk3 and mk4 in low light shooting?

Headshotzx wrote in post #12469287
Yeah, shooting 12mp on the 1Dmark4 (instead of full resolution) and comparing it to the 1Dmark3, you can see a drastic improvement especially once your ISO hits four digits.

You might be surprised at how little difference there actually is. It is certainly not drastic. The 1D3 does quite well, and the 7D also does quite well, the 1D4 is better however. Is it 115% better than the 1D3? That is a subjective question.

Again, shooting the same scene with both bodies side by side with the same settings is the only way to make that kind of fair surgical assessment.

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

In extremely low light, shooting moving targets, the 1D3 will yield more keepers than the 1D4, but that is a topic for another day.

Oh is that so? Could be true I guess, seeing how I couldn't compare both the 1D3 and 1D4 side by side, and I'm sure the 1D4 has had certain firmware updates maybe to AF and what not. I was only able to get a 2 day loan of the first unit in SG so maybe things changed.

Regardless, I owned a 1D2n before, and no matter what, new cameras will always be better in some way. But if the 1D3 works for you at the price you paid for, you shouldn't be salivating over a 1D4 yeah.

chenga732 wrote in post #12469275
From reading other people opinions, 1d mk4 has higher usable iso setting. Have you personally view the difference between 1d mk3 and mk4 in low light shooting?

Not sure what you shoot, but the 1D3 is really not that impressive at high ISO performance. Even the 1Ds2 is better at high ISO. See for yourself: http://snapsort.com …-vs-Canon_EOS-1Ds_Mark_II

The 1Ds2 at 1,480 ISO is equivalent to the 1D3 at 1,078 ISO. If you look up the 1D4, the 1D4 at 1,320 ISO is equivalent to the 1D3 at 1,078 ISO. I have a 1Ds2 and I can tell you from personal experience that it handles high ISO very well. The newer bodies may have a higher ISO boost, but it doesn't mean that they handle the higher ISO better.

I was going to buy a 1D3 until I found that site that I shared. When I saw how well the 1Ds2 handled ISO it was the reason I bought that camera over the 1D3.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12469412
You might be surprised at how little difference there actually is. It is certainly not drastic. The 1D3 does quite well, and the 7D also does quite well, the 1D4 is better however. Is it 115% better than the 1D3? That is a subjective question.

Again, shooting the same scene with both bodies side by side with the same settings is the only way to make that kind of fair surgical assessment.

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

In extremely low light, shooting moving targets, the 1D3 will yield more keepers than the 1D4, but that is a topic for another day.

This is a very good example of how little difference there is between the 1D3 and 1D4 in terms of ISO handling.

Now, compare that to the 1Ds3 and you have a bigger difference. The 1Ds3 at 1,663 ISO is equivalent to the 1D3 at 1,078 ISO. http://snapsort.com …vs-Canon_EOS-1Ds_Mark_III

The 5D2 at 1,815 ISO is equivalent to the 1D3 at 1,078 ISO. http://snapsort.com …I-vs-Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_II

If your goal is high ISO handling it then going with a FF body will benefit you the most. As you can see, from the 1Ds2 to the 1Ds3 to the 5D2, they all have less noise at higher ISO than the 1D3.

However, I believe, in regards to the 1D3 and 1Ds3, there seems to be a belief that at much higher ISOs, the 1D3 does better overall than the 1Ds3. I have not had a 1Ds3 to do any comparison with, and I might just be remembering past discussions incorrectly too.

I loved the 1D Mark III when I owned it. It worked well, even up to ISO 6400.
.