Anyone gone from a 1D3 to the 5D3?

Hi,

Considering it myself but would like some honest feedback - especially about IQ and AF.

Even better of course if you made the switch and then I could get a real comparative.

Ta.

John_N wrote in post #14671115
Hi,

Considering it myself but would like some honest feedback - especially about IQ and AF.

Even better of course if you made the switch and then I could get a real comparative.

Ta.

I have both. the 1D3 is the backup for my 5D3. The 5D3 is much better in most ways. I find I can push the 1D3 images slightly more in post though plus the 1.3 crop is nice with longer lenses as well as the more rugged build and weatherproofing.
The 5D3 is just a much more advanced camera though in both IQ and AF.
Would be happy taking my 1D3 out all day though.

AF significantly better IMO and IQ is outstanding. The crop factor is void since cropping a 5D3 image will yield a 13 megapixel image with the same FOV as a 1D3.

jase1125 wrote in post #14671736
AF significantly better IMO and IQ is outstanding. The crop factor is void since cropping a 5D3 image will yield a 13 megapixel image with the same FOV as a 1D3.

Yes true.

jase1125 wrote in post #14671736
The crop factor is void since cropping a 5D3 image will yield a 13 megapixel image with the same FOV as a 1D3.

theviper wrote in post #14672562
Yes true.

The crop factor is only void if, as you say, you crop the outer portion of the FF image. If instead you adjust focal length in order to use the whole frame in both cases, the higher pixel count of the 5D3 - and less subsequent enlargement required - are major factors.

Or have I missed something?

Sorry I didn't follow that - I was with the MP countering the crop.

Great to hear about the AF - I am so tempted!

John_N wrote in post #14674559
Sorry I didn't follow that - I was with the MP countering the crop.

My point was that if you fill each frame with the subject by adjusting focal length, resulting in two identical images, the 5D3 one will be 22mp whilst the 1D3 one will be only 10mp.

My point was that if you use the same FL on both bodies and subsequently crop the outer portion of the 5D3's image to give the same framing will the two resulting versions have a similar pixel count. Actually, having done the maths, the 5D3 image would have, as a previous post said, 13mp against the 1D3's 10mp so the FF body wins hands down either way.

I may have misunderstood, but that's how I read it.

I have the 5D3 and used to have the 1D3 and currently have the 1D4.....the 5D3 is a better camera than the 1D3 but the 1D3 is an outstanding camera especially for sports and low light shooting.....for the price of a used camera today the 1D3 is a bargain

I agree on the price - got mine for around £1.2K, which I hope to get back when I upgrade to the 5D3 (which knowing me and my obsessions will be soon) - I'll have to shift a few other less used lenses and equipment too sadly but that the price of things I guess.

JohnB57 wrote in post #14672643
The crop factor is only void if, as you say, you crop the outer portion of the FF image. If instead you adjust focal length in order to use the whole frame in both cases, the higher pixel count of the 5D3 - and less subsequent enlargement required - are major factors.

Or have I missed something?

No, you've missed nothing. What you say is the complete truth. Why throw away pixels needlessly when a little thought and a switch of lens will produce higher quality work?

The point was the reach advantage of the 1d3 isn't an advantage at all when using the same focal length lens. Cropping a 5d3 image to have the same field of view results in an image with 3 more megapixels. It goes without saying if an option exists for a longer lens or to zoom with your feet then one should. More pixels on target is always desired for maximum image quality.