Stay with the 1D Mark iii or leave?

I have the 1D Mark iii and I love it but I feel like the 5D mark ii would benefit me more.

I shoot primarily Weddings, Engagements, Senior photos, and other local events. I rarely shoot sports and I don't shoot them for money. I love shooting Nature/Landscape shots and I didn't know if the 5D ii would be equal or better for quality and more pixels.

I am in the middle of the transaction of selling my 1D iii and would like to know if I should go through with it and buy a 5D Mark ii. Thank You.

Carl
_______________
1D Mark iii, 50D, Sigma 70-200mm, EF-S 55-250, EF 50mm 2.5, EF-S 18-55, Tamron 10-24mm[/FONT]

As much as it pains me to say this, but for what you like to shoot, I'd say that the 5D Mk II would be a better choice.

I think you would be better off with the 5D Mark II. The biggest compromise you will make is the af system. Get use to only using the center af point and recomposing. You will have far for leeway for cropping.

A professional photog friend of mine here shoots architecture, stock, interiors, and pretty much anything but sports or weddings. He was waiting for the announcement of the new 1Ds series, but as we know the 1D X was announced. His 1Ds MKII is a bit long in the tooth so he decided to try the 5D MKII in the mean time. He actually loves it. The bigger screen and larger image size are both pluses. I thought he would hate going from 45 AF points to 9, but he claims it is no big deal.

The difference in DOF/sensor size between aps-c and aps-h is right about the same as the difference between aps-h and 35mm. In these days, I say if what you have is very good then keep using it! 10 MP from a 1D will print very large. A 16-35mm on your 1D3 will give you a FOV of 21mm at the wide end which is pretty darn wide! I rarely go wider than 28mm these days on my 5D with most times at 35mm as my widest. If you go with too short a focal length, you introduce perspective distortion as well as what can be an unnatural looking perspective.

Why are you selling it? For more pixels should not be the answer.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #13558566
Why are you selling it? For more pixels should not be the answer.

Why? Sometimes more pixels are needed.

Gregg.Siam wrote in post #13558496
A professional photog friend of mine here shoots architecture, stock, interiors, and pretty much anything but sports or weddings. He was waiting for the announcement of the new 1Ds series, but as we know the 1D X was announced. His 1Ds MKII is a bit long in the tooth so he decided to try the 5D MKII in the mean time. He actually loves it. The bigger screen and larger image size are both pluses. I thought he would hate going from 45 AF points to 9, but he claims it is no big deal.

That's because you really use and pick 1 focus point for the shot. I shot with my 1dmarkIII for 2 years+. I just got the 5dmarkII about a week ago. I love it. I see more details in the shots. Also, most of my lenses can take advantage of the full frame sensor too. However, because of the large files (25mb+), it takes a bit longer to load and edit the files. Battery life isn't that great comparing to the 1dmarkIII. It is about 600 shots+ on the 5dmarkII on a single charge.

You need better lenses for the 5dmarkII if you do decide to get one. The high MP sensor can easily out resolve all of your lenses.

I feel that the 5D Mark ii has better movability around its settings rather than the manual modes of the 1D iii. Also, I think that the pixels does have a lot to do with my decision. I have had many shots where the pictures just don't come out with clarity.

I have both. Owned the 5D II for about a year and the 1D III for several months - I'm selling the 5D II. After using the 1D III, and the 1D IIn that I had before, the 5D just feels "sluggish" and and simply don't like using it. The files from the camera are amazing, but if you're not worried about pixels and super-high ISO, the 1D III files are equally amazing.

Get a 1Ds III

EDIT

Ah, didn't see the lenses you're using. You'll need to upgrade, as someone else said, FOR SURE to some quality primes and L-glass

Erik_L wrote in post #13566497
I have both. Owned the 5D II for about a year and the 1D III for several months - I'm selling the 5D II. After using the 1D III, and the 1D IIn that I had before, the 5D just feels "sluggish" and and simply don't like using it. The files from the camera are amazing, but if you're not worried about pixels and super-high ISO, the 1D III files are equally amazing.

I've had the 1D Mark III since it was released, and am interested "side-grading" to the 5D II except I'm concerned about the sluggishness as well. I'm very spoiled by the 1D- it has fast everything. It's not like the 5D speed really matters for my hobbyist purposes as I can certainly adapt to slower AF/processing, but can you elaborate on the differences in speed between the 1D and the 5D?

Another Bugatti vs. Maybach thread...

I mostly like the 1D for how quickly at acquires AF, and the shorter mirror-blackout time. Those are the two biggest things for me.

BCinMB wrote in post #13566611
I've had the 1D Mark III since it was released, and am interested "side-grading" to the 5D II except I'm concerned about the sluggishness as well. I'm very spoiled by the 1D- it has fast everything. It's not like the 5D speed really matters for my hobbyist purposes as I can certainly adapt to slower AF/processing, but can you elaborate on the differences in speed between the 1D and the 5D?

HighPixel wrote in post #13566635
Another Bugatti vs. Maybach thread...

If you don't like them, don't read them. It's awesome for you that you can afford both, but, for many of us it's sadly an either-or question and, to be honest it's a tough call between those cameras (I know, because I've started my fair share of these threads and though I absolutely love my 1D3, I keep wondering if I'd be happier with a 5D2).

Keep the 1D3 - its a all-round great camera. Plan on improving your lens line-up instead.

Hope this helps (or frustrates : )