


Jim G wrote in post #6432964
So I guess he might not be owning 1D IIs for much longer...

I heart my 1D3's high ISO.
Me too, it's fantastic. Funny thing is, Kamp said he rarely uses the MK2's after getting the 5D's because the IQ is so much better. But now, it appears the MK III's IQ has trumped the 5D's by a big enough of a margin that he is looking forward to only using the MK III tomorrow.
He is also drooling over things like weather sealing and "auto ISO" capabilities. However, his favourite feature is the ability to write RAW to one card, and JPG's simultaneously to the other card, which he couldn't do with the MK2's. He uses the JPG's to preview images on his laptop to show the bride and groom.
Yesterday, I actually got a chance to play with a D700 for a while.
If I was coming from any Canon prosumer/consumer body, I would be salivating over that thing. However, compared to my MK III, I still feel it would be a 1/2 step back in ergos and performance. Without the grip, the body was too small, and with the grip, it was too big (bigger than my MK III). Also, in relatively low store lighting, the AF on the D700 struggled compared to my MK III's. However, after the initial hesitation acquiring a lock with the D700, it did seem to track in a decent manner.
And as nice as the new LCD's are, I STILL feel it makes little difference to me compared my MKIII's LCD... I don't get the hype. It's certainly an improvement, but not as big as I had expected. I also played with the 50D, and it's new LCD is the same (or slightly better) than the D700's. But again, not as big a deal as I thought it would be. Ironically, the LCD gave the impression the images were sharper than they actually were when I got home and looked at them on my workstation. I had some motion blur in a couple shots, but on the D700's LCD, the image looked tack sharp. So, it's sort of the opposite problem of what we get with the lower res thumbnails on the MK III LCD that make the images seem too soft in preview (it's not the LCD's fault). Either way, you just get used to it which is easy if you only use one camera. I can easily discern sharp/in focus shots on my MK III's LCD, however, if you owned a camera with a newer LCD, and an older one, then going back and forth could be difficult (but again, it's not really the LCD's fault, it's the resolution of the preview thumbnail).
I tried ISO3200 on the D700, and it was fantastic, about 1/2 stop better than on my 1D MK3, however, it's a bit difficult to compare because the D700 images to me seem sort of "flat" and "plasticky" to my eyes (personal preference). ISO3200 wasn't bad in this regard, but ISO6400
definitely looked like an image that had too much Noise Ninja applied to it. I guess I'm not used to the "Nikon look". But still, an incredible output at high ISO's.
Don't get me wrong, the D700 is fantastic, definitely in it's own league at it's price point, but I think the 1D MK III has me spoiled. The 50D seems nice too, but again, not in the same league as the MK III (as it shouldn't be for the price).
Having now tried the Dark Side, it makes me more grateful for what I have with my Canon .
EOS R6 Mark II - Sigma 50/1.4 Art - Sigma 14-24/2.8 Art - Canon EF 70-200/2.8L Mark III - Godox Xpro-C - Godox TT685C x2