-= 1D MkIII Owners discuss =- and Post Your Pics

dtufino great shot.

1D MKIII and 400 f2.8 with a 1.4x

Gadget-Guy wrote in post #14601838
1D MKIII and 400 f2.8 with a 1.4x

Nice! Love the bright, vibrant, robust colors! That's how ALL photos should look. Nevermind all this flat, dull, artsy fartsy touchy feely "mood" looking stuff. (Unless of course that's the "effect" you're going for.)

^^ That's a killer capture, GG... Print and frame that sucker!!!

See ya later fellas. Off to FF land. The 1D3 is an amazing camera and I wouldn't hesitate to buy one again... but I could use the money for glass right now and possibly a second body, along with more lighting bits.

Still Going Strong...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14603141
Still Going Strong...

Still really liking mine and it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Man you guys are really persuasive. Esp Jay, Mark, and Gadget-Guy. Making the decision between a 1D3 & 1D4 a tough one. The 1D4 is sweet, but the savings on a 1D3 would get me a sweet piece of glass.

Canonswhitelensesrule wrote in post #14603556
Man you guys are really persuasive. Esp Jay, Mark, and Gadget-Guy. Making the decision between a 1D3 & 1D4 a tough one. The 1D4 is sweet, but the savings on a 1D3 would get me a sweet piece of glass.

Personally for me (your mileage may and will vary) if I did not need the extra ISO of the Mark IV, I would have purchased another Mark III. Don't get me wrong, I love the Mark IV, but the III is sweet as well.

dwarrenr wrote in post #14605110
Personally for me (your mileage may and will vary) if I did not need the extra ISO of the Mark IV, I would have purchased another Mark III. Don't get me wrong, I love the Mark IV, but the III is sweet as well.

Thanks for the input...much appreciated. I've been going back and forth on this.

To be honest, I couldn't care less about higher ISOs. I doubt that I'd ever shoot above ISO 1600, possibly on occasion ISO 3200, and from what I've seen, the 1D Mk III handles that very well.

My main reason for considering the 1D Mk IV would be for the extra 6 MP which would be nice to have for cropping purposes, esp if I'm going to make fairly large prints from the files. (16 x 20, 24 x 36, etc)

Also, the brighter rear LCD screen would be nice to have, (My aging eyes aren't what they used to be, and it would be a nice feature when using live view to help with precise focusing.). Also the newer technology would likely make the camera last longer.

These aren't deal breakers, just features that would be nice to have.

But as I mentioned in my last post, the price difference would allow me to purchase some nice additional glass. Even perhaps a used Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L I.S. lens if I could find a really good deal.

Canonswhitelensesrule wrote in post #14603556
Man you guys are really persuasive. Esp Jay, Mark, and Gadget-Guy. Making the decision between a 1D3 & 1D4 a tough one. The 1D4 is sweet, but the savings on a 1D3 would get me a sweet piece of glass.

Had a bad experience first time round with the MKIII as brought one second day of its release but am pleased to say the later serial one i have now although its an old press camera and well used is excellent.

I sold my MKIV and 300 f2.8 IS L due to finding a mint one owner 400 f2.8 IS L which was my dream lens and i would never of been able to afford until the newer big whites were announced and only got a MKIII as a backup to my 7D but now use it as my main camera again.

Will be picking up another 1DMKIV to replace the 7D once the 1DX is in full swing and the second hand market starts to see a few more MKIV's available again but my MKIII wont be going as for value for money it is an incredible camera.

Think you have the main advantages of the MKIV summed up with higher ISO performance and the improved rear screen along with Auto ISO and larger files for crops but i still find the MKIII focuses better in low light and also has more than enough resolution for decent sized prints.

By the way must say stunning work aswell guys love the images in this thread.

Gadget-Guy wrote in post #14606970
Had a bad experience first time round with the MKIII as brought one second day of its release but am pleased to say the later serial one i have now although its an old press camera and well used is excellent.

I sold my MKIV and 300 f2.8 IS L due to finding a mint one owner 400 f2.8 IS L which was my dream lens and i would never of been able to afford until the newer big whites were announced and only got a MKIII as a backup to my 7D but now use it as my main camera again.

Will be picking up another 1DMKIV to replace the 7D once the 1DX is in full swing and the second hand market starts to see a few more MKIV's available again but my MKIII wont be going as for value for money it is an incredible camera.

Think you have the main advantages of the MKIV summed up with higher ISO performance and the improved rear screen along with Auto ISO and larger files for crops but i still find the MKIII focuses better in low light and also has more than enough resolution for decent sized prints.

By the way must say stunning work aswell guys love the images in this thread.

Thanks Gadget-Guy. Nice to know that the 1D Mk III has enough resolution for decent size prints. Hopefully even for landscape/scenic/wildl​ife images. Even things such as the Aurora Borealis, grand canyon, etc.

Funny that you mention the 300mm f/2.8L I.S. and 400mm f/2.8L I.S. lenses. Those two have also always been my dream lenses. A bit moreso the 300, since that was the first focal length/ aperture fast telephoto lens I ever used when I shot Nikon some 25 years ago. (The old manual focus Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF lens)

Canonswhitelensesrule wrote in post #14607130
Thanks Gadget-Guy. Nice to know that the 1D Mk III has enough resolution for decent size prints. Hopefully even for landscape/scenic/wildl​ife images. Even things such as the Aurora Borealis, grand canyon, etc.

Funny that you mention the 300mm f/2.8L I.S. and 400mm f/2.8L I.S. lenses. Those two have also always been my dream lenses. A bit moreso the 300, since that was the first focal length/ aperture fast telephoto lens I ever used when I shot Nikon some 25 years ago. (The old manual focus Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF lens)

Then once I switched to Canon, I wanted their version...esp since it's WHITE!!

Then as I got more into wildlife images, I loved the extra reach of the 400mm lens, but still wanted the fast, f/2.8 aperture. Brighter viewfinder etc.

As I said, I'd love to have both, but thinking in terms of reality, the 300mm f/2.8L I.S. lens is a lot less expensive, and thus would be easier to get sooner.

Hopefully one day, I'll have both. Plus a new EF 600mm f/4L I.S. series II lens. I've shot with a 600mm f/4 lens before, and they are literally untouchable. The butter smooth bokeh, the incredible subject isolation. You really have to use one to believe it.

Damn this lens lust huh?

Well, they do say that glass is more important than the body, so maybe the better investment would be the 300 2.8. Sadly, I just got my 300 last week, as you know, and I won't be able to really use it until this Sunday. So it's been mounted on my 1D4 ever since. I'm sure the 300 will find time on my 1D3 as well.

And I've had great experience cropping 1D3 images, although I'm not doing huge prints. But from what I see on-screen I would think they'd be ok up to medium sizes.

kenjancef wrote in post #14608505
Well, they do say that glass is more important than the body, so maybe the better investment would be the 300 2.8. Sadly, I just got my 300 last week, as you know, and I won't be able to really use it until this Sunday. So it's been mounted on my 1D4 ever since. I'm sure the 300 will find time on my 1D3 as well.

And I've had great experience cropping 1D3 images, although I'm not doing huge prints. But from what I see on-screen I would think they'd be ok up to medium sizes.

Thanks for the input, Ken. Very much appreciated. My other dilemma is that I like to keep my cameras for at least 10 years, so whatever camera I decide to buy really has to last me a while. (Unless of course I run into some unforseen moola, but otherwise, the 1D body I buy, better be in good shape. :lol.

When the time comes, if I can find a great deal on a 300mm f/2.8L I.S. in nice shape, and a 1D Mk III where the combined price is about $5,000, then that seems to make the most sense. If I only have around $4,000 to spend, that makes the decision a bit tougher. . But I've always really liked the "look" of the files from the 1D Mk III. Just something about them.

Screw it...I'll win the lottery, get a 1Dx, a 1D Mk IV (for the extra reach) and the new series II EF 300mm f/2.8L I.S., EF 400mm f/2.8L I.S. and EF 600mm f/4L I.S. lenses! Plus converters! Problem solved!. (I might even buy an extra EF 300mm f/2.8L I.S. original version 1 lens...since I actually prefer the "putty"/off white/cream color of the series 1 I.S. telephoto lenses vs the newer, more "grayish" color series II lenses.) Yes I know, I'm picky...possibly OCD. haha.

One more from the British MotoGP