Full Frame or 3/4

I have in a very small way started bird photography and I know I have a long way to go seeing all the fantastic pictures here. I have a used 1ds I would like to trade (I am tired of a dirty sensor and not daring to clean it myself. It also feels too slow ) I have among a few lenses my favourite glass 300mm 2.8 which I very often use with 1.4 extension. (I do not like the 2.0 extension lens)
I can afford a used 1 ds MK2 or a new 1d MK3 (when the auto focus problem is fixed). Which is best do you think? More pixels and maybe more cropping or the very fast MK3 with less pixels and perhaps less cropping?
If you could choose between the new 1ds MK3 or 1d MK3 which one would you pick?
I know of a place where a kingfisher comes in spring and I would very much like to take good pictures of it. I have studied the location and think that maybe a 500mm lens would be perfect. (Not much cropping with 1d MK3) If I could find a good used EF 500mm IS would I be able to hand hold it for short periods of time getting pictures I cannot get with a bean bag or a tripod which I of course also will use.
I am a woman, quite small 160 cm or close to 5 foot 4. I had a bad time in the beginning with the weight of the 1ds body and the 300mm 2.8 lens. Got back, neck and shoulder pain and tired arms. I started weight lifting and work out. After a long time I can now bench press 70 kilos (about 150 pounds) which is my limit. The rest of my body is on par. Now it is much easier to carry the body and the 300mm lens lens but what about 500mm of heavy glass?
Thank you for all answers

Liu

Good questions and welcome to the forum! You and I are about the same size. I work out a lot too and I can't bench anywhere close to what you can, so I guess I need to start eating more protein bars or something!

I have a 1D III and a 500mm. From what I understand the 1D and 1Ds are aimed at different types of photography - the former being more geared toward action and the latter more toward studio type work. Of course, I'm sure they can both get great results regardless, but it seems to me that the 1D would be more appropriate in general for bird photography, based on what I've read.

The 500mm is a great lens and also works well with the 1.4x teleconverter for 700mm of reach. I can hand hold the 500mm briefly, if I'm leaning against something or sitting down. There is another forum member who teaches workshops on bird photography with handheld long lenses. I asked him if he has many women in his workshops and how successful he thinks someone my size could be handholding a 500mm. He assured me that it was very possible to do and many women in his workshops have done it. So given that you can bench 150 lb., it sounds well within your ability!

Why not just buy the new 40D...I think it would be great for birds...Check out some of the shooters on here using them...And alot cheaper than the other bodies too...Then you can buy a bigger lens, and hire someone to carry it for you..Ha..Ha... By the way welcome to the forum and good luck on the Kingfisher...steve

Welcome to the Forum Liu. I have been shooting birds and wildlife for some time using the 20D a 1DsMkII and just recently the 40D. While I like the FF, for birds and wildlife I can't seem to get close enough which means more cropping. Since I bought the 40D it hasn't been off my 500/f4 except to add a 1.4 for extra reach. I ordered the MK3 a week or so ago but canceled the order after Canon finally recognized the AF problem. But I will reorder once the problem is corrected. As for the 40D, I have had excellent results with it combined with the 500 for in-flight and find the AF response to be closely equal to that of my 1Ds. The main reason I prefer the MK3 is number of focus points, nine is not always enough, especially if you have as hard a time as I do trying to keep the center focus point on the subject. For me I prefer the the 40D for small birds on stationary perches and the MK3 for in-flight and fast moving action.

Dear Liz

Thank you very much for your answer!
I don´t know if I am naturally strong. Probably not. I am now 41 and started benchpressing 3 years ago. Every second day I worked with my arms, back and shoulders and the day after with the rest of my body. I rested 1 day a week. I had fun going to the gym, being happy if I raised my bench record just half a kilo ( a little more than a pound)
It took 2 years to reach 70 kilos. I was very careful to not overdoing it. An injury can take months to heal. When I was on jouneys or not having access to a gym I did push-ups, hoping that one day I would be able to do it with one arm! I never could! If possible I did pull-ups too.
I think I made it because I had such fun just raising my record a tiny bit even if it took weeks to bench press a fraction more. Now I work out 3 days or 4 days a week. It keeps me on this level.
You can do it! And maybe you are younger.

Liu

Ting_Liu wrote in post #4233173
Dear Liz

Thank you very much for your answer!
I don´t know if I am naturally strong. Probably not. I am now 41 and started benchpressing 3 years ago. Every second day I worked with my arms, back and shoulders and the day after with the rest of my body. I rested 1 day a week. I had fun going to the gym, being happy if I raised my bench record just half a kilo ( a little more than a pound)
It took 2 years to reach 70 kilos. I was very careful to not overdoing it. An injury can take months to heal. When I was on jouneys or not having access to a gym I did push-ups, hoping that one day I would be able to do it with one arm! I never could! If possible I did pull-ups too.
I think I made it because I had such fun just raising my record a tiny bit even if it took weeks to bench press a fraction more. Now I work out 3 days or 4 days a week. It keeps me on this level.
You can do it! And maybe you are younger.

Liu

Liu - At 39, I'm not far behind you in age. I guess it comes down to setting the goal and working towards it. Have you ever visited this women's weight training site? Lots of good info and entertainingly written. Anyway, I don't think you'll have any problem with the 500mm! And as others have said, the 40D might be an option for you, especially with impending recalls of the 1D III. I'm taking mine to Alaska soon and will be able to give it a good test there. So far I've experienced the Err 99 a few times and that's made me a bit nervous.