5d Mark II or 1d Mark III?

i have £3k to spend, vote pls

Depending on what you shoot, that will make a huge difference in what you need.

For me personally, 1D3 all the way. In my book, the 1D3 is an absolute annihilation over the 5D2. But like I said, it's dependent on what I shoot (which is always something that is moving around).

Umm, I don't see how this is a legit question with no information given.
What do you shoot?

if you need FPS, 1d
if you shoot portraits/landscapes and other things that don't require FPS and better AF 5d

Go with the 5 and send me the change - I need to upgrade!

What do you shoot?

Thanks sorry, got home abit excited cause my local store had a 5d II on display played with it and loved it, but then the other day i played with my colleague 1D iii and i loved that too so i'm left in a bit of a dilemma. I do sport, fashion/portraits, actually i pretty much do anything depending on projects that i have, i am not afraid to explore. currently i got the 50D, maybe ill sell it save up abit more and get both? :-s

Two entirely different beasts, and beasts they are. Since you say you shoot sport, I say go 1DIII. But I might be a little biased...

If you are going to need fast AF, AF in low light or low contrast conditions, or if you shoot in severe environments or senarios with a good amount of camera abuse then the 1DMIII; otherwise get the 5DMII. There are other things that would point me towards the 1DMIII, but you are money limited.

As always ... get the best glass you can, cameras come and go.

I like to shoot everything and sports have the most demand on my equipment. The MK3 obviously will be the best choice for sports and can manage all the other demands as well. I also shoot HDR so the 7 shot AEB is also important for me.

MK3 FTW

I have both, and I can tell you it'd be a very difficult choice!

1DMKIII of course has the speed, build, AF system, etc...

5D MKII beats the 1DMKIII in sheer IQ (21MP vs. 10MP = no contest), the LCD screen if that matters, and HD movie mode if that matters.

But again, it depends. The 21MP image certainly offers up mega cropping possibilities, and lower apparent noise. The AF on the 5DMKII is lacking other than the center AF point compared to the 1DMKIII.

I've been using the 5DMKII for everything except action shooting. The IQ just can't be denied. I shot golf the other day and I used the 1DMKIII exclusively though...the speed just can't be denied!

hoanglong wrote in post #7944739
Thanks sorry, got home abit excited cause my local store had a 5d II on display played with it and loved it, but then the other day i played with my colleague 1D iii and i loved that too so i'm left in a bit of a dilemma. I do sport, fashion/portraits, actually i pretty much do anything depending on projects that i have, i am not afraid to explore. currently i got the 50D, maybe ill sell it save up abit more and get both? :-s

Based on you stating that you shoot sports I voted 1D MKIII.

If you want to just want to waste money, just send it to me.

If not, get some L lenses, or just don't spend the money. If you aren't sure what you need, it's a clear sign that you don't need anything right now.

5D Mark II wins in image quality.
1D Mark III wins in everything else.

Personally I think image quality is pretty important in a camera, but if I shot sports I would take the 1D Mark III.

I am a sucker for shallow DOF, and detail and I don't shoot sports so I have 5DMII and 5D (oh, I shoot wedding too with 2 bodies).

That said, I've shot sports with 5DMII, perhaps I got lesser hits than 1D users but I still got good hits nonetheless. Body aside, it's really speed vs image, which one you willing to compromise?

no brainer. the 1dmkIII isn't a jack of all trades, its a MASTER of all. FF shooters might be stunned and shocked to learn that outside of sports stadiums and african savannahs, the 1dmkIII can also shoot landscapes and portraits in studios as good as any ff camera if not better.