Good 1DsIII Review

Came across this in my travels. Thought some others may want to read...
Video is very lame, however.

http://reviews.cnet.co​.uk …9030232,4929575​3-1,00.htm

Now if I could only afford one.

Pete

Pete Kossaras wrote in post #5068617
Now if I could only afford one.

Pete

Same. I dont need a review to tell me its good, I KNOW its good, just like I KNOW I cant afford one!

I can afford one, but decided to wait for 5D replacement since I don't need one that is THAT GOOD

1.5 Kg's

Yummy yummy

lol

I know it's good. Don't need a review to tell me that. I'm gonna land one of these gems pretty soon and I can't wait!

mebailey wrote in post #5068527
Came across this in my travels. Thought some others may want to read...
Video is very lame, however.

http://reviews.cnet.co​.uk …9030232,4929575​3-1,00.htm

The review was not that good in my opinion. The reviewer kept comparing the Canon 1Ds Mark III to the Nikon D3 as if they were in the same class. Sorry, but there's really no comparison between 21.1 and 12.1 megapixels! If he wanted to compare, then I'd say compare and contrast the Nikon D3 to the Canon 1D Mark III or even better the Canon 5D. The 1Ds is really in a class by itself (for now) because of the resolution as a 35mm full-frame DSLR.

Other than that, I guess he covered most of the features okay.

Carrying on the 'bad review' theme posted by rsmedley; I believe that expert knockers (pardon the terminology) have fallen over themselves to criticise the behemoth that is the 1ds mark3. Negatives have included:

-It's too pricey
-LCD is only 230,000 pixels
-Viewfinder slants by 2-5%
-Noise at all ISO's
-Menu system is still not as intuitive/user friendly as other cameras
-Less than L glass will produce sub-standard results on this camera

Roll up, roll up . . . who's next for a pop? Even Amateur Photographer's Barney Britain slammed the camera, although at least he tried to be meticulous and objective. He failed somewhat, because in his summing up, despite some quite serious misgivings, he pretty much implied that it's one helluva camera. Contradiction or what?

I believe that Nikons (and some other Marks too) are flavour of the month and this makes me wonder about conspiracies (and I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist - I believe Man did walk on the moon) but I'm probably very wide of the mark here.

If you want a Nikon (or Sony, Fuji, Pentax/Samsung) be my guest. But there's just something kind of stylish about a Canon. From my time with my Porsche T90 through to my 400D, I'm a committed Canonite, I will admit. I have now saved up (yes, I had to save mightily) and purchased the 1DS Mk 3 and fired off some 500 shots already (mainly landscape). I'm in the process of uploading some images to Zenfolio but I'm already able to to give a quick summary of the camera:

It's big & heavy (albeit reassuringly so) and will never be used as a 'go-anywhere' model. Sharpness, colour rendition, noise, are all 'medium format' quality, no doubt, and the viewfinder is just breathtaking. You kinda believe you've got a masterpiece everytime you compose your image in the finder.
Keep alert for those Canon killjoys - but we know they're just green (and slimey) with envy, don't we!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Michael Lopez wrote in post #5110819
Carrying on the 'bad review' theme posted by rsmedley; I believe that expert knockers (pardon the terminology) have fallen over themselves to criticise the behemoth that is the 1ds mark3. Negatives have included:

-It's too pricey
-LCD is only 230,000 pixels
-Viewfinder slants by 2-5%
-Noise at all ISO's
-Menu system is still not as intuitive/user friendly as other cameras
-Less than L glass will produce sub-standard results on this camera

Roll up, roll up . . . who's next for a pop? Even Amateur Photographer's Barney Britain slammed the camera, although at least he tried to be meticulous and objective. He failed somewhat, because in his summing up, despite some quite serious misgivings, he pretty much implied that it's one helluva camera. Contradiction or what?

I believe that Nikons (and some other Marks too) are flavour of the month and this makes me wonder about conspiracies (and I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist - I believe Man did walk on the moon) but I'm probably very wide of the mark here.

If you want a Nikon (or Sony, Fuji, Pentax/Samsung) be my guest. But there's just something kind of stylish about a Canon. From my time with my Porsche T90 through to my 400D, I'm a committed Canonite, I will admit. I have now saved up (yes, I had to save mightily) and purchased the 1DS Mk 3 and fired off some 500 shots already (mainly landscape). I'm in the process of uploading some images to Zenfolio but I'm already able to to give a quick summary of the camera:

It's big & heavy (albeit reassuringly so) and will never be used as a 'go-anywhere' model. Sharpness, colour rendition, noise, are all 'medium format' quality, no doubt, and the viewfinder is just breathtaking. You kinda believe you've got a masterpiece everytime you compose your image in the finder.
Keep alert for those Canon killjoys - but we know they're just green (and slimey) with envy, don't we!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

I have to agree. I just picked up a copy of Shutterfly and the review oozes with jealosy rather than an honest review. Although he mentions the 21 megapixel image of the 1Ds, he concentrates on noise, function, etc ad naseum and only blithely mentions "see my review of the 1D" rather than giving all 1Ds it's due -- lazy and smacks of "I wish I owned one but really can't afford it so I'm going to blow it off as just another D-SLR". Sad, lame and not really very objective.

Michael Lopez wrote in post #5110819
Carrying on the 'bad review' theme posted by rsmedley; I believe that expert knockers (pardon the terminology) have fallen over themselves to criticise the behemoth that is the 1ds mark3. Negatives have included:

-It's too pricey
-LCD is only 230,000 pixels
-Viewfinder slants by 2-5%
-Noise at all ISO's
-Menu system is still not as intuitive/user friendly as other cameras
-Less than L glass will produce sub-standard results on this camera

Roll up, roll up . . . who's next for a pop? Even Amateur Photographer's Barney Britain slammed the camera, although at least he tried to be meticulous and objective. He failed somewhat, because in his summing up, despite some quite serious misgivings, he pretty much implied that it's one helluva camera. Contradiction or what?

I believe that Nikons (and some other Marks too) are flavour of the month and this makes me wonder about conspiracies (and I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist - I believe Man did walk on the moon) but I'm probably very wide of the mark here.

If you want a Nikon (or Sony, Fuji, Pentax/Samsung) be my guest. But there's just something kind of stylish about a Canon. From my time with my Porsche T90 through to my 400D, I'm a committed Canonite, I will admit. I have now saved up (yes, I had to save mightily) and purchased the 1DS Mk 3 and fired off some 500 shots already (mainly landscape). I'm in the process of uploading some images to Zenfolio but I'm already able to to give a quick summary of the camera:

It's big & heavy (albeit reassuringly so) and will never be used as a 'go-anywhere' model. Sharpness, colour rendition, noise, are all 'medium format' quality, no doubt, and the viewfinder is just breathtaking. You kinda believe you've got a masterpiece everytime you compose your image in the finder.
Keep alert for those Canon killjoys - but we know they're just green (and slimey) with envy, don't we!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

I find that this camera only excells even further when mated to an "L". And I just don't get the "the camera is heavy" thing? I find the weight to be no problem at all.

ashdavid wrote in post #5111090
I find that this camera only excells even further when mated to an "L". And I just don't get the "the camera is heavy" thing? I find the weight to be no problem at all.

The weight just serves to balance your L!

mebailey wrote in post #5111319
The weight just serves to balance your L!

So that what is was! LOL