New (to me) 1D3..Questions

So, I just picked up a 1D3 the other day and I love the way it feels in the hand and the way you can customize it to fit your needs. I am coming from a T2i and the 1 series truly is a awesome camera but I am not so impressed with it...
I've only had it 3 days and I have read the manual front to back and gotten very familiar with the operation of it and have taken some pics with it. Just some basic snapshots at my son's B-day party and such...but, I ain't impressed with the images it produces compared to my T2i....I dont know if I just haven't gotten used to it or what but it seems I have to run the ISO high all the time. I dont know if thats normal or not? (It was only bumped up to get a good exposure)
Yesterday, at my son's party, it was inside, with some pretty good ambient coming in as well as flouresent lighting over head and the ISO had to be pushed to 3200. Shutter speed was 1/160, aperature was 2.2 and Lens was a Nifty-Fifty.

Just wondering is this normal...? Or am I just expecting too much?

Maybe I'm expecting something "Ground Breaking"

Well, for what you're using it for, the 1D3 won't hold much leverage over the T2i. Where the 1D excels at is the ease of operation, autofocus and reliability.
I think for high-iso, you're better off shooting in RAW if you aren't already and work on it in Lightroom or Photoshop, they'll clean up pretty nicely - much better than those from the T2i. Another problem might be the fluorescent lighting, considering using your speedlites and bouncing them.

I just ran a quick lil test shot against my T2i and it is clearly a better image from the 1D3....maybe its just me and I set the expectations too high too soon....lol. IDK...My wife was like, "You paid that much for that body and thats the pics it takes?"
She kinda gave me a complex..LoL..

Jperture wrote in post #15373687
Well, for what you're using it for, the 1D3 won't hold much leverage over the T2i. Where the 1D excels at is the ease of operation, autofocus and reliability.
I think for high-iso, you're better off shooting in RAW if you aren't already and work on it in Lightroom or Photoshop, they'll clean up pretty nicely - much better than those from the T2i. Another problem might be the fluorescent lighting, considering using your speedlites and bouncing them.

Yea, I do shoot in RAW and the images do clean up much easier than the T2i's and I didn't bring my flash because I figured it would be plenty of light.....maybe I'm being too critical..HAHAHA!

Ah, give it some time and get used to the settings and whatnot. It'll prove itself to be the better camera in the long run.
Some things that come to mind if you're comparing the photos right of the camera screens is that the T2i has a larger and more vivid screen with a higher resolution, so that might've made it look better. Another is the 18MP vs 10MP - at 100% they'll be different.

I switched from a T1i to a 1D2 2 years ago using a nifty fifty as well, and the change in image quality was stellar.

Thanks, I feel in my heart, that I just need some more time with it. Real test will be next month at one of my daughters Cheer competitions!

wards75 wrote in post #15373688
I just ran a quick lil test shot against my T2i and it is clearly a better image from the 1D3....maybe its just me and I set the expectations too high too soon....lol. IDK...My wife was like, "You paid that much for that body and thats the pics it takes?"
She kinda gave me a complex..LoL..

The 1D3 is very capable, but it only does what you tell it to do.

Why would you think the ISO you need for a correct exposure is going to be different for one camera body vs. another? If the 1D3 needs ISO 3200 to complete at correct exposure at 1/160 and f/2.2, then any other camera will need the same.

JeffreyG wrote in post #15373848
The 1D3 is very capable, but it only does what you tell it to do.

Why would you think the ISO you need for a correct exposure is going to be different for one camera body vs. another? If the 1D3 needs ISO 3200 to complete at correct exposure at 1/160 and f/2.2, then any other camera will need the same.

Yea, good question....and I am realizing that I probably just need to settle into the camera and let it work..Think I just expected it to take "Creamy Dreamy Pictures" just by holding it!! Hahahaha!!

I do love this camera!

So you still have your "Toy"2i (JK)? Take the SAME image using the same settings and same lens on both the T2i and the 1D3. Better yet, if you have a zoom, shoot at f/5.6 under good lighting and change the zoom to compensate for the 1.3 vs 1.6 crop factor.

You'll see some small differences between the two. THAT is the difference between the bodies. You can't just shoot with one and declare it is better or worse.

My 1D3 walks circles around my T2i. I hardly ever take the rebel out of the drawer any more. I freaking love the 1D3. You will get in the groove. Tough light is always tough light, so don't expect studio results in those situations. Bring light, find light, shoot out in light, or go dark and moody

My wife can tell the difference in the results. Even just in the fact that I it took me two days to shoot swim team action shots for 70 with the T2i, but I am able to do it in one day with the 1D3. The IQ is clearly better as well.

Enjoy!

JeffreyG wrote in post #15373848
Why would you think the ISO you need for a correct exposure is going to be different for one camera body vs. another?

Bingo. It's stuff like that that leads me to believe that often people buy cameras they're not ready for. I believe the OP is one of these people.

A lot of people learn the technical aspects and physics of photography long after owning camera equipment, doesnt mean they can't take great photos and love the hobby.

wards75 wrote in post #15373662
Maybe I'm expecting something "Ground Breaking"

I think when we see what others are doing with certain cameras or lens, we tend to expect the same from our like purchases right off the bat. I remember when I first started with my Rebel T1i and kit lens, my first purchase was a 15mm-85mm lens and I was a little disappointed thinking 'is that it?'. When I posted that reaction on this forum, I had a very rude comment of "if you can't tell the difference, you shouldn't have that lens." Really?

We grow into our equipment, we learn, we get better and then we are thankful for the equipment we have. Keep working at it - you will learn to play that camera well. Keep posting and happy shooting.

wards75 wrote in post #15373662
Yesterday, at my son's party, it was inside, with some pretty good ambient coming in as well as flouresent lighting over head and the ISO had to be pushed to 3200. Shutter speed was 1/160, aperature was 2.2 and Lens was a Nifty-Fifty.

Just wondering is this normal...? Or am I just expecting too much?

Maybe I'm expecting something "Ground Breaking"

The 1D3 is a great camera... I bought one new for $4,600 and just sold it a few weeks ago. It took some amazing images for me... most of my use was sports. The exposure settings you need for a given shot are going to be the same for any camera - ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. Sounds like you are just wanting to shoot on an auto mode and have it make magic for you. The 1D3 is a professional camera, and as I said... $4600 new, so consumers were not Canons target audience. As a pro camera, the expectation is the shooter will be choosing the settings, not the camera. So any auto modes are going to be better on the Rebel lines.

Another thing is that the in camera processing of images is not the same. On the spectrum from the cheap point and shoot up through a pro body like the 1D3, an "out of camera" image is often going to look better on the point and shoot because Canon designed it that way. In camera processing is destructive. Most pro shooters shoot RAW and want all the sensor captured information to process to their taste. For example, I've seen a Canon chart that shows the amount of sharpening done on the bodies, and the expectations is that you will sharpen the image in processing with the pro bodies, but the on a consumer body they do more in camera. So bottom line is your processing skills on the computer with something like Adobe Lightroom are going to be necessary to achieve what Canon intended for the 1D3... by design. If you want to shoot mostly on auto modes and get ready to use Jpegs from the camera, then the 1D3 isn't the best choice.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #15376155
A lot of people learn the technical aspects and physics of photography long after owning camera equipment, doesnt mean they can't take great photos and love the hobby.

I never said that, now did I? I simply said that some people buy equipment before they're ready for it. This is the photographic equivalent of a new Ferrari owner asking what the pedal to the left of the brake pedal is for.

I think the OP would have been better off with a $30 book or a class at the local rec center than a $1,300 camera. I'm not saying this to be a jerk or anything, I honestly believe it. I believe in upgrading my equipment when I feel that I've outgrown the old one, or I find specific things the old one can't do/isn't suitable for my use.

I don't think this was the case with the OP. It appears that the OP wasn't happy with his photography and, without any real legitimate reason, thought that a new body would be the key to automatically improving his photographs. Since that was obviously an erroneous assumption, I think my statement that he bought the camera before he was ready for it is rather apt.