5D vs 1DMarkIII - IQ, IQ, IQ

how about at iso 1600 and 3200?

ed rader

They are so different. It depends on what you'll like better.

IQ wise they are neck in neck with the M3 winning the iso battle. Yes, it's really as amazing as it's reputed and the 5D is NO SLOUCH in that area either. But where I'd go to 1600 iso on my 5D with no issues but really think about 3200, I freely use 3200 on the M3 and have even used 6400 (which cleans up to a very useable shot)

The 5D's colors are more saturated (raw, right out of the camera) and it doesn't process reds as well as the M3, the colors (raw, right out of the camera) of the M3 are more natural and though it took some time to get used to the difference, I now prefer them. The 5D's FF gives you a much more shallow DOF than the same lens on the M3.

What I miss from my 5D, FF...I miss that show DOF, I miss 14mm being 14mm.
What I don't miss? Everything else.

With the IQ being neck and neck, the M3 is faster, the 1.3x sensor gives you perceived distance increase. I have way less dust issues now.

There are issues with some of the M3 bodies having problems, as I'm sure you have read. I believe that there are as many (or more) people who have it and enjoy it w/no issues but they aren't as vocal because they don't have a problem (if mine were acting up, I'd be as vocal as possible w/o being rude, in hopes that canon would pay attention and fix my camera). Overall, the choice is yours...

Now, IF I had to do it all over again (sell my 5D and buy the M3) would I? Probably...but the temptation to have the best in both worlds in a 5D2 is very high.

Only you can decide what your ultimate goal is.

cdifoto wrote in post #4108695
Flip a coin. You're the limiting factor anyway.

Slightly off subject, but I don't totally buy this argument anymore. I am always the first guy to admit that I'm not a great photographer. No argument from me on that. That said, I think everyone can take better IQ photos with a better camera. I've got a good friend who uses a 30D that I go shooting with all the time. I would never claim to be a better photographer than he is, but even he agrees that the exact same shot I take with a 5D looks better than that on a his 30D.

I always hear stuff like, "It's not the camera....even a P&S in the right hands will make great shots". I think those statements are a bit of an exaggeration because if there was no difference, people wouldn't buy the more expensive cameras. Bottom line is that I believe that even a mediocre photographer can benefit in IQ with a better camera, ceteris paribus.

So...in case it was clear, I don't claim to be a great photographer...never have. My composition might suck, but when I was in Italy (the reason I got back into cameras), there are tons of shots that I just don't think I could have gotten with a P&S or even a 30D for that matter.

P51Mstg wrote in post #4108702
JDizzel is right, both are darn good. Personally I think the 5D makes a better image, bu tthen the Mark III is not slouch either.

I've got 2X 5Ds and use them on stuff that isn't moving, and I use the Mark III on stuff that is moving (including jets up to 700MPH and close). They both have their uses and they are both good at what they do.

Of course I think the backup 5D is going to get sold shortly to help pay for for the EOS-1ds Mark III.

Mark H

I'm kind of along the same thinking. I am thinking I might end up getting the 5D replacement later, but in the meantime, I am hoping I don't miss my 5D too much while I'm using the 1D Mark III.

Things I love to shoot now:
- landscapes
- portraits (just starting). I want to get some good shots of my parents and family.
- macro (jewelry, flowers)
- night shots
- some weddings (for CLOSE friends and family)
- I love large prints. I have a portfolio (just for myself) with all 12x18 prints

Some important events coming up:
- my sister's wedding early next year
- Formula 1 race (just for fun...not professional)
- Don't have kids now, but who knows.

I took some pics of a bike race this year and the 5D just didn't cut it. I thought the 1D Mark III would be better for the upcoming wedding because of highlight priority, but I don't want to lose in IQ (if that is the case). So the only thing I think I'd lose wiith getting rid of the 5D is resolution and possibly IQ. I think I can live with the resolution loss, but I'd hate to lose the 5D's great low-light and high-ISO performance.

cowpix wrote in post #4109064
I would concur with this. For all-around situations, I find my MarkIII better.

Thanks...that's the kind of experience I was hoping to get. Just a reminder again that I'm just a weekend warrior. I do this strictly for fun, so I'm almost certainly not going to be as good as you guys.

To me the Mark III produces the best overall image, but I still prefer the "feel" of the 5D images.

SunTsu wrote in post #4109850
I always hear stuff like, "It's not the camera....even a P&S in the right hands will make great shots". I think those statements are a bit of an exaggeration because if there was no difference, people wouldn't buy the more expensive cameras. Bottom line is that I believe that even a mediocre photographer can benefit in IQ with a better camera, ceteris paribus.

Don't confuse a great picture that is worth looking at and enjoying with a boring and uncreative sharp/saturated/contra​sty/whatever picture you can get with top gear. Ideally, you want both, but I am certain which I want first. I got some great pictures with my old 2MP Kodak P&S.

Tommy Jensen has both BTW and he may chip in, or Pm him. Personally, I would want a 5D first because the shots just feel right to me and the bokah is beautifully rendered. Shots just pop. I don't care about all the frills and thrills you get with the pro bodies because I am a simpleton. Truth is that it all depends how and what you shoot. No right answer.

Sorry for all the replies. I just figured out there is a multi-quote feature.

Permagrin, thank you for the feedback as that's the kind of feedback I was hoping for. I'm surprised about the ISO performance, but that's good news.

I already figured I'd miss the wide end and maybe the narrower DOF, but I should be happy once I get the 16-35. I will really miss using the 24-105 as my walk-around lens though.

Since I've got your attention, I'm wondering if you ever miss the extra 2.8MP.

Permagrin wrote in post #4109750
They are so different. It depends on what you'll like better.

IQ wise they are neck in neck with the M3 winning the iso battle. Yes, it's really as amazing as it's reputed and the 5D is NO SLOUCH in that area either. But where I'd go to 1600 iso on my 5D with no issues but really think about 3200, I freely use 3200 on the M3 and have even used 6400 (which cleans up to a very useable shot)

The 5D's colors are more saturated (raw, right out of the camera) and it doesn't process reds as well as the M3, the colors (raw, right out of the camera) of the M3 are more natural and though it took some time to get used to the difference, I now prefer them. The 5D's FF gives you a much more shallow DOF than the same lens on the M3.

What I miss from my 5D, FF...I miss that show DOF, I miss 14mm being 14mm.
What I don't miss? Everything else.

With the IQ being neck and neck, the M3 is faster, the 1.3x sensor gives you perceived distance increase. I have way less dust issues now.

There are issues with some of the M3 bodies having problems, as I'm sure you have read. I believe that there are as many (or more) people who have it and enjoy it w/no issues but they aren't as vocal because they don't have a problem (if mine were acting up, I'd be as vocal as possible w/o being rude, in hopes that canon would pay attention and fix my camera). Overall, the choice is yours...

Now, IF I had to do it all over again (sell my 5D and buy the M3) would I? Probably...but the temptation to have the best in both worlds in a 5D2 is very high.

Only you can decide what your ultimate goal is.

Hmm, this proves that 55.17% of the people who voted have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

freddyco wrote in post #4110421
Hmm, this proves that 55.17% of the people who voted have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

heh, or vice versa

Hell, if money were no object I'd have a pair of 1D Mark III, and a 1Ds Mark III! I'd keep a 5D on hand for when I just wanted to go "light". Too bad I actually have to work to pay for this stuff that makes me hardly any money, but offers me pure shooting pleasure.

From the sample images I've seen I think it would be very difficult for the average joe to discern the difference between the two bodies. I think it takes the critical eye of a professional pixel peeper to make the call. As many have already pointed out, both are very capable bodies and the 5D was pretty much the benchmark for Canon IQ since it's introduction.

I would suggest going with the Mark III. I work for a newspaper and wanted the resolution so I got a 5D. The guys needed the speed and went with the Mark III. Well, my 5D has had major flash sync problems and it's the camera, not the flash. I've found on the internet as well as speaking with a pro photog visiting from LA that they've had the same problem. Others haven't. So there may be a few lemons out there and I have one. So for night football games, the resolution has saved me but I have to get in the stands to take advantage of the light. It's now been sent off and I'm using the sturdier MarkIII. Wish I had gotten that in the first place. I'll be shooting Fri night highschool football with it for the first time tonight. Though I hate using flash, at least I know it won't be a hit or miss thing. And any daytime shots with fill flash needed will be something I don't have to worry about.

Again, I love the 5D for daytime and good lighting situations. But if you buy it, good luck and hope you get one that actually works.

Okrafeet wrote in post #4110777
Well, my 5D has had major flash sync problems and it's the camera, not the flash. I've found on the internet as well as speaking with a pro photog visiting from LA that they've had the same problem. Others haven't. So there may be a few lemons out there and I have one.

i thought i was the only one feeling why my 580 isn't flashin properly sometimes with the 5d.. it goes bang bang bang on my mark3 and goes bang bang nothing bang nothing bang bang.. its not a battery issue as it works like it's supposed to once i slap it on the 1d

condyk wrote in post #4109915
Tommy Jensen has both BTW and he may chip in, or Pm him.

Look at my post just before yours. I am an owner of both and to me the 5D is absolutely magic. I consider the Mark III more as a tool and use the 5D for more artistic / personal work.

jeff aka catpath has both and says he hardly uses the 5D anymore as he is that in love with his MarkIII