Musings on my 'new' 1D3

The 1D3's only flaw, for me, back when I had a couple was its 10mpx images. The resolution left nothing for cropping out sections. The 1D4 fixed that and upped the ante for ISO performance.

Here is the link for the files
http://86.24.134.199/i​ndex.php/s/9KpWr5OhaLS​xpSG

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17984131
The 1D3's only flaw, for me, back when I had a couple was its 10mpx images. The resolution left nothing for cropping out sections. The 1D4 fixed that and upped the ante for ISO performance.

I totally agree with that. My 1D3 will be used primarily for shooting my 6 year old grandson's athletic sporting stuff. So far, I am not focal length challenged, so a lot of cropping won't be needed. (But, I am willing to accept donations toward a 200-400 f/4L w/1.4X. ) The kicker? The 1D3 was $600. I have seen 1D4 bodies at $1400-$1800. That matters to me.

As the 1D4 was the last APS-H, I don't see its price dropping too much more. It now has a unique standing in the line up while people can get their hands on one.

Bassat wrote in post #17984165
I totally agree with that. My 1D3 will be used primarily for shooting my 6 year old grandson's athletic sporting stuff...

You will be very happy with this body for that kind shooting. For shooting my son's soccer (now 9yold) I chose 1dIII over 5dIII. The main advantages of 1dIII are:
1. mirror flip is very quick so the viewfinder is clear and that helps me to keep the center point on the player
2. red illumination of the active focus point also help to keep on the target
3. reach colors look great on jerseys
4. 10 fps
5. battery life
6. easy to PP in LR
7. very quick response of AF

I have not noticed the AF works quicker with 400/2.8 L IS, but certainly works faster with 85/1.2 II.
I am using this body mainly 80% with 135/2 (pictures below) or with 200/2.8II. Fast aperture on 135mm also helps me keeping ISO up to 1000.
https://www.facebook.c​om …68.100000543155​841&type=3

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17984131
The 1D3's only flaw, for me, back when I had a couple was its 10mpx images. The resolution left nothing for cropping out sections. The 1D4 fixed that and upped the ante for ISO performance.

Yeah but it was practically perfect when you could frame subjects fully in daylight!

IMAGE LINK: http://jakehegnauer.ze​nfolio.com/p326415976/​e54cb06f6

Totally agree, and I think the 1D3 in my experience has a certain character you can't replicate with anything new else, I have an a6k now and LOVE IT, but if I had the opertunity to have a second body, I would but the 1D3 again, I have shot weddings with it, it got hit by a car at a Motorsport event, fell in the mud and never skipped a beat!

Damn, I'm off to look on eBay now!

There's ones in the buy and sell going for like $500.00 recently.

This was the last ever shot i got on my 1D3
It was awesome but at the moment i can't justify having one back....

Anyone want those config files?

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wAeU​Uv

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17984131
The 1D3's only flaw, for me, back when I had a couple was its 10mpx images. The resolution left nothing for cropping out sections. The 1D4 fixed that and upped the ante for ISO performance.

I don't understand peoples reticence to crop a mk3?? I've supplied loads of A4 prints from a 2000 pixel (on the long edge) crop that the customer was more than happy with.

I agree, I printed an A0 from my 350D and it looks great!

I looked through a couple of the PDF files. There is a LOT of detail in those files. Thanks for posting. I don't know the camera well enough to make use of the .CSD files, yet. For now, I'll just change settings as needed.

I did notice in a few settings you have "flash-sync speed in Av" set to AUTO. I don't ever do that. I leave it set to 1/max on all my cameras. If I need other than max, I go to manual mode. Flash is just easier in manual (camera) mode.

One other thing I saw was the use of HTP. I tried that on my 500D. To my eyes, HTP messes with exposures, especially flash exposures. HTP only does one thing for you: it guards against blowing highlights. I think sometimes it is too aggressive, and underexposes the entire image, generating noise. If I am worried about highlights, I shoot raw and monitor 'blinkies'. There is usable highlight headroom in those blinkies!

I will find my post that shows what happens when crop down and then that final result gets resized for a print. It isn't great, the image softens up if you really look at the image. Also an a4 print just isn't that large, and if you okay with less than 200dpi on a print, that is good that works for you, it won't for others. Depends on your needs... we could not produce posters from cropped action shots with the 1d3, but could from the 1d4. Just like people are okay with dvd quality videos, others want HD and even 4k.

gotta feel sorry for all those guys wasting their time for years shooting with a 4mp 1d classic...

So for a 20x30 poster, you see no differences in quality from a 4-6mp vs a 10+mp file? This is more a rhetorical question because we print NBA posters, and after 4 years of this venue, I already know the answer. The 1d4 fixed that for me and was the ideal camera for what I was shooting. I switched out only when I saw the pending price plummet about to hit. Before that it was the 1d3, and it did pretty well for me, enough to own a couple of them.

More resolution is good for several things related to IQ and final print. The 1d3 is limited in that regard for many shooters, I am not alone. It is a great camera beyond that, but a couple of today's crops are even better now. It is an extremely good camera at the current price point though, which is part of the draw now.