Canon 5D Mark iii vs Canon 5D Mark iv

Hello,
I'm looking for a camera that will take great pictures at higher ISO numbers like 1600 or 3200. The initial camera I was considering was the 5D mk iv but the 5D mk iii is a lot cheaper. Is there a big difference between the cameras of the shots coming out at the higher ISO? Thank you for any help, it will be most appreciated.

I'm not sure without going to the Canon website and placing a checkmark next to them both to compare.
For my own needs I ordered the 5D IV $2499.99 for pickup after comparing it to the 5DS and mirrorless.
A new 5DS USA version is approximately $3499.99
If the features and all specifications are good enough for your needs an imported 5DS $1129.99 "appears to be a good deal" if you can find a really good honest online store. The 5 DS has more MP and no touch screen it really depends what compromise your willing to live with.
Better yet pickup one at a retail store.
I drive hundreds of miles if necessary and pickup my lenses and camera bodies.
I never mail order expensive camera bodies and lenses.
This is after reading a couple low star reviews about shipped lenses being out of whack.
I personally think camera bodies and lenses may be getting roughed up a little and knocked out of adjustment by careless delivery people.

I've used both, and am currently using the 5DM4. Even the Mk 2 performed well for me in low light images, but the MK 3 should do well for you. MK 4 is nice if you can afford it, newer processor, touch screen. I still have my MK 3, wife uses it when we go shooting together.

Very good point about the touch screen. My 6D II has it and it's very nice. Spoil yourself if you can afford the extra.
Touch screen is another reason I'm going with the 5D IV. It should save a little wear on the dials and knobs making the camera body last longer.

Thank you for your comments, I appreciate them. I am leaning towards the 5D mark iv but at the moment am not in a position to do anything. My wife has about 2 months to live so everything is put on hold. Thank you again for your insights.

I had 5D III before upgrading to 5D IV. I loved the 5D III while I had it, and the only reason why I upgraded to 5D IV was because of crop-ability with 8.1 more MPs. As primarily a bird photographer, it made a significant difference. I didn't notice any differences in their ISO performances, however.

raven4ns wrote in post #19133588
Thank you for your comments, I appreciate them. I am leaning towards the 5D mark iv but at the moment am not in a position to do anything. My wife has about 2 months to live so everything is put on hold. Thank you again for your insights.

I am so sorry to see this... there are no words...

raven4ns wrote in post #19133588
Thank you for your comments, I appreciate them. I am leaning towards the 5D mark iv but at the moment am not in a position to do anything. My wife has about 2 months to live so everything is put on hold. Thank you again for your insights.

Truely sorry to hear this. I could not imagine what you are feeling. Thoughts and Prayers for you and yours.

Thank you for your kind words.

Tim

Sorry to hear the news about your wife. Best wishes to all.

Tim,

So sorry about your wife. May your time together be good.

MkIII vs IV? I've got both, use both in low light situations, high school marching band and sports mostly. Typical ISO I use in those situations is 12,800, but I have no problem going to 25,600 (MkIII) or 32,000 (MkIV). Of the two cameras, I think the MkIV is better on high ISO and on virtually everything overall. I specifically think the IV is better in the range you want, ISO 1600 and 3200. All that said, the MkIII is a fine camera. When you are ready to choose, if money isn't an issue, I'd recommend the IV. If money is an issue, I'd recommend the III as it will serve you well.

As a final thought, when I bought the IV, I knew it had small improvements over the III. I waited until the price dropped from its initial release. The III is a workhorse and does amazing things. The IV is just a little bit better in many areas, but enough so that I prefer it over the III. (The III has about 90,000 shots on it, the IV about 30,000. I don't do continuous shooting at all.)

Hope this helps!

Thank you for the kind words. It is much appreciated.

Tim

I’m comfortable pushing my 5d iii to 2200 ISO. I like the dynamic range and clarity up to that ISO for large prints. Anything higher and it begins to become noticeable in the prints to me. However for screens I can push it over 6400 ISO with little decrease in quality.

From what I’ve seen, the 5d iv equivalent to the 5d iii in my use cases would be 3200 ISO.

If you’re only shooting for screens or you’re not cropping or need the better AF, the 5d iii is a fantastic deal. The 5d iii has a great AF system and for me rarely struggles for anything other than very fast action in low light.

raven4ns wrote in post #19131912
Hello,
I'm looking for a camera that will take great pictures at higher ISO numbers like 1600 or 3200. The initial camera I was considering was the 5D mk iv but the 5D mk iii is a lot cheaper. Is there a big difference between the cameras of the shots coming out at the higher ISO? Thank you for any help, it will be most appreciated.

Big difference, very big!

Thank you for your thoughts. Because I won't be getting it for a while perhaps it will continue to decline in price.

Tim