1D MkIII Vs 1Ds MkII

I would like to get some opinions on this. I am looking to upgrade from a 40D to a 1D body and I am looking at a used 1D MkIII or a 1Ds MkII. The cash outlay is very close so it is really down to the real life advantages of one over the other and I would like some comments from users that have experience with both.

My shooting is primarily urban streetscapes, Wildlife, architecture and portraits

Any 1st hand recommendations would be appreciated

Thanks

You will love the 85 L on either body. Kind of difficult to choose.

I only have experience with the 1DII and 1DsII, but I can say that for all of your shooting other than Wildlife, the 1DsII would be a far better choice. The only advantage of the 1DIII for wildlife would be faster fps, larger buffer, and an improved AF system. That being said, the 1DsII is no slouch either -- you might find the fps and buffer limiting though (I don't).

Other than that it comes down to cosmetic differences and the subtle refinements that come with the 1DIII, such as a bigger, better LCD, AF microadjust, better menu system, etc.

The 1DsII will be a step back in usability but will otherwise blow the 40D away even more substantially than the 1D3 would.

I say go with the 1D3. It's better than the 1DsII in terms of noise and almost everything else except for full frame and higher MP. They're both great cameras and as Alex mentioned above me it's also a step back in terms of controls.

Well all I can say is look at photo's from both, lots of photo's. Try to use both too if you can, side by side would be better.

If you need the speed then you would like the 1DIII better but seeing that you probably dont need the speed and AF you might be happy with the 1dsII

No way of knowing without trying both. You should also keep in mind that Canon COULD release the 1DIV this fall or winter. I have heard of two accounts and the latest of which was in December.

Good luck with your choice.

-Eric-

I have a 1D2, a 1Ds2, and a 1D3. The 1D3 is a great camera with outstanding high ISO performance but the shots that come out of the 1Ds2 are nothing short of magical. The color saturation, warmth and overall pop makes the 1D2 and 1D3 look cold and flat by comparison. If high ISO and high fps are high on your list of priorities then choose the 1D3 otherwise go for the 1Ds2. Especially for architecture and portraits.

Michael

I went from the 5D classic to the 1DMKIII, the difference is thrilling. The image IQ is wonderful, especially for portraits, unsure what Michael is talking about but trust that he can see the difference. I personally believe the 1DMKIII is the finest camera I've ever worked with and I've been shooting many decades. I've also shot a 1DsMKIII and it's nice but nothing that makes me feel I "need" one, unless I really needed the extra detail.

The feel and way the MKIII works in my hands is so quick and easy, the AF with the 85L is stunning and I no longer worry over having that closer eye in crisp focus when shooting at 1.2. The microfocus adjust is very worthwhile as is the dust removal system but what seems most important is I no longer have to think about the camera very much, it's use has become intuitive and quick. Lately I've just left the 85L on it as my go to lens and toss a 24L or 2470L in the bag along with a 580EXII (but I hardly ever use onboard flash for other than a really low fill light).

The "look" I get out of the MKIII is most of what sold me on the camera, I contrary to Michael feel it has more pop and much better color than my 5D had and it was really good. On portraits, I much prefer the look I get out of the MKIII than the 5D. I have not used a 1DsMKII and was considering getting one instead of the MKIII and will still consider it if I really do need more detail as a second camera because they are so inexpensive right now compared to the 1DsMKIII but there is nothing that I've gotten out of the MKIII that tells me I need anything different.

That said, I'll be saving up for the eventual need to get a new camera body and anticipating that it will be a 1DMKIV when they come out, maybe. More than anything, I'm shooting available light, environmental portraits and the MKIII with the 85L is PERFECT! It translated to a 110.5mm equivalent focal length which is definitely a sweet spot for me when shooting portraits. On FF however, I prefer the 135L far over the 85L for portrait work. Both have excellent image quality but I just don't personally care for the 85L on FF for head shots and I know many will disagree with me and that's okay.

But if you do get the 1DsMKII, do consider getting the 135L, fab color/sharpness and bokeh.

I used to think I had to have FF until I got to borrow a MKIII for a couple of months. I became addicted to the 1.3 crop with the combination of lenses listed in my sig, everything is better for me with the 1.3 crop. I find the width of my lenses is enough in almost all cases, and find that curious but it works for me very well. If I truly need wider then I'll go get another (had one before but didn't use it) 16-35.

And oh to the OP, the lens lineup you have would be wonderful with either camera. I see you already have the 135L. Actually you're lens line up is really, really good for either 1.3 crop or FF.

Also consider looking at Adorama for refurbished bodies of either model, I did that with the MKIII and got it for $2,999 plus $149 for a two year warranty. For all intended purposes, the camera is brand new.

They currently have a 1DsMKII refurbished: http://www.adorama.com …rchinfo=canon+r​efurbished

Just keep looking as the MKIII comes up quite ofen as well. But I do know I have found many 1DsMKII"s for around $2,000 but expect they were used by pros who put a lot of mileage on them, that said, the 1D cameras are meant to be shot a lot and I'd imagine that even with a rebuilt shutter, at the right price, one of them would be a good camera.

Started with a 20D .. Added Grip
Added a 5D Classic + Grip
Sold 20D .. Bought 40D (kept Grip)
Added 1DMkIII

All three have their niches for me and all are reliable tools.

1DIII!! the improved AF system alone is worth. I had the chance to shoot with one last weekend,I am now sold, will be selling both of my current bodies to get one.

It all depends, since these are two different beasts. It's like saying 50d vs 5d (or used 1dmkii (not n) vs 5d), just doesn't make sense. For portraits, lanscapes, ff is usually better because you can't back up. For causal shots, street photo, etc, up to your style. if you shoot in the 17-35 range with 1.6 crop, ff is probably better, but if you are like me and like the 35-70 range on 1.6 crop, 1.3 crop is better (since then you can use a 50mm ). Wildlife, sports, edge to mkiii on focusing, but edge to 1dsmkii for pixel density (especially for birds)

1DMKIII. Other than 16.7MP and FF, it does everything else better. Better ISO, operationally similar to 40D, 1.3x crop might be a nice "middle ground", micro adjust, dust removal, bigger LCD.

Went from a 1DsII to a 1DIII, bought the 1DIII as a second camera. I eventually ended up selling the 1DsII as it was never used anymore. Do not get me wrong it is a superb camera and a workhorse. It is just that the 1DIII is so much nicer to use. I do not agree with Michael. I think the 1DIII IQ is better than the 1DsII.
One of my friends sold his 1DIII and bought a 1DsIII. He is not enjoying it and is going to convert back to the 1DIII.

Thanks everyone so much for the responses. It has helped to make up my mind on the 1D MkIII.
I would like to get some opinions on the pricing for a very lightly used DMkIII (8000 Act) and fully updated by Canon. I can pick it up for $2400