1DsMii or 1DMIII

Hi All,

I need another body to suppliment my 5D. I have $3000 to spend. I'm looking for opinions on what to buy, a used 1dm3 or used 1dsm2.

I shoot mostly glamour/adult stuff. Rarely printed above 20x24. But far and away most for web sites and smaller prints.

I also shoot some UFC type fight events. I have had some of these enlarged to poster size by the venue. (no idea of processed used). I don't do a lot of this, maybe once every couple of months

I also shoot events in night clubs, for web sites. Rarely if ever printed at all.

If you have experience with the above mentioned bodies, which would you purchase. Oh, I only use L glass.

The most important thing for me is IQ for the Glamour work, followed closely by Fast Accurate AF. I really would like the outer focusing points to be able to more useful than they are on the 5D

Shooting in dim clubs can be a real issue with the 5D. I know no camera is going to shoot in total darkness!

I'm not considering the 5D, I want the 1 series body and AF. The real issue is between the 1DsM2 and 1DM3

I really appreciate your input.

Thank you very much for your help!

Either would likely get the job done--I'd take the mkIII for the cross-type sensors and cleaner high ISOs--the IQ is very good, and the difference between 16 and 10mp isn't that much.

I went through the same decision process as you, and ended up with the 1D3. I don't need the 10fps, but it sounds like you might if you're shooting UFC fights.

Thank you for your help! (we have the same equipment it seems too!)
Have you made any large prints from the mk3? As I said, I don't often, but every model I shoot always wants at least one 20x24 for their wall. I've gotten great results from the 5D, so if it's that good, I'm cool.

How about croopping? Occasionally I need to crop off some area around the girl or even a bit more. Can the 1d3 handle that well?

I really appreciate your insight and having blazed the path before me!

Jimi V wrote in post #9029896
Thank you for your help! (we have the same equipment it seems too!)
Have you made any large prints from the mk3? As I said, I don't often, but every model I shoot always wants at least one 20x24 for their wall. I've gotten great results from the 5D, so if it's that good, I'm cool.

How about croopping? Occasionally I need to crop off some area around the girl or even a bit more. Can the 1d3 handle that well?

I really appreciate your insight and having blazed the path before me!

I have not made any large prints, but I actually was planning to, for the same reasons you mention--I'm getting a 20x30 of a model, to see how it looks. I'm subscribed to this thread, so I'll report back when I get it (assuming you can wait a few days).

If you're willing to try a crop camera (1.3x mag) then the 1D3 might be your solution. If you want to stick to FF, then, the 1Ds2 is no slouch. I switched from a 5D to a 1Ds2, and as much as I like the 5D, the 1Ds2 is that much better in terms of larger file sizes, AF, etc. There are some things, like the dual button menu on the 1Ds2 that take a week or two to get used to and the smaller screen size...but, in the end, it's the final image that counts. I like my 1Ds2.

Markitos, Hurry up on that will you?! LOL I'll be really interested in hearing what you find- 5D vs 1dm3 large prints!

Manish, Yes, that is one of the dilemmas I'm facing, going 1.3 or staying FF. I love FF but wonder if the 1.3 is really going to hurt that much. And I love the large lcd of the M3. But I don't really use the screen that much. Except in clubs when the girls want to see what they look like in the pictures. But when I'm shooting glamour, I don't don't chimp much.

How is the 1ds2 screen though? Can you tell if an image is sharp? I'm sure the contrast and such is off from what a monitor would show, but can you tell if you are getting the exposure anywhere close? The most important though is if you are getting it sharp! Can you tell from small lcd?

Not so much, from the screen, though I only use it to check the histogram. I will say though, that the AF has not disappointed me at all...neither on location, or in studio, so I trust it enough to not worry about it.

Boo on the screen, but great to know the AF does the job!!

Jimi V wrote in post #9030114
Manish, Yes, that is one of the dilemmas I'm facing, going 1.3 or staying FF. I love FF but wonder if the 1.3 is really going to hurt that much.

I wondered about missing FF as well, and find that I very rarely miss it at all. I am mostly a portrait/wedding shooter, though, so ~21mm equivalent (with the 16-35) is usually wide enough for me (and I always have the 5D if I need to go wider). On the flip side, I find the little extra DOF to be nice for max. aperture portraits, and I actually really enjoy the range of the 24-70--more of wide normal ~31mm on the wide end to a very nice portrait FOV at the 70mm (91mm equivalent). I always found the 1.6x crop cameras to be a bit too weird focal length-wise because I couldn't estimate them very well, esp. going back and forth from a 40D to the 5D... with the 1Dmk3, they seem much closer to what they "should" be.

Sort of off topic, just curious, what are the main factors that led you rule out 5D mkII?

Because I want the build and AF of the 1 series. I've played with the 5D2 a bit (not too much). I want the one piece (I only use the 5D with the battery pack, feels too small without it) and body build of the 1 series and the AF. I was tremendously disappointed with Canon for not really updating the AF, which I always thought was the weak spot of my 5D. Don't misunderstand, I can get the 5D to focus almost anywhere I use it. And I get a high keeper rate, but I find it's ability to lock on, nowhere as good as any series 1 body.

Please don't misunderstand, I think the 5D2 is a fine piece of equipment, capable of amazing images. I just really have the need for a camera body built like a 1 series.

I have the 1DM3, 1DsM3 and 5DM2. Push comes to shove, for me, anyway--the 1DsM3 does a a slightly better job than the 5DM2, primarily because of the focusing system.

On the other hand, for anything to do with action, the 1DM3 is king--up to the introduction of the IV model, I suppose. I have no problem making 17X22 prints from the 1DM3, even from slight crops, but both the other cameras are more than double the pixels and at 100 percent they show more resolution.

There are good buys on both one series cameras right now, since you already have the 5D, I'd opt for the 1DM3, keep the 5D around until a successor comes out for the 1DsM3 and buy it at a much better price--probably what the 1DM3 started at.

I love my 1DS2 but for what you're doing, I'd pick the 1D3. Better high ISO, lightning quick AF and responsiveness, and a better AF point spread for portraits (assuming your lenses work for you on 1.3x).

My understanding of the "better" AF of 1DIII is mainly for the moving tracking, like in sports or bif. Seems to me for what you are shooting (e.g. glamour portraits) you are not taking advantage of it. Most reviews of 1DIII I have seen focused a lot on the action part, they don't talk much about portraits. You may want to dig a little bit deeper to find that info.

dchen99 wrote in post #9030514
My understanding of the "better" AF of 1DIII is mainly for the moving tracking, like in sports or bif. Seems to me for what you are shooting (e.g. glamour portraits) you are not taking advantage of it. Most reviews of 1DIII I have seen focused a lot on the action part, they don't talk much about portraits. You may want to dig a little bit deeper to find that info.

But he also shoots MMA. Nothing wrong with the 1DS2's AF for sports in low light but I'd want the frame rate of the 1D3. And if you're not printing large, might as well take advantage of the AF point spread of 1.3x for portraits.