1Ds mk III - Any disadvantages?

I know the replacement is right around the corner, but I see that as a pro - used prices are approaching "expensive", instead of their usual level of "ludicrously expensive".

I currently shoot a 5D mk I and I love it. I have cut my lens collection down to the 50L and 16-35L mk II as I like being close to what I shoot. The combo works great, but AF in low light leaves a LOT to be desired from the 5D. I have tried a friends 1D mk III as well as his 1Ds mk III and AF on both is rock solid, even in very bad light. Live view would be nice to have again (shot a 40D before the 5D) for product shots and architecture as well.

I like the size and handling of my 5D so I'm gonna keep it for family shots, zoo trips etc and use the 1Ds for shoots with customers (weddings, models etc) that I can't have waiting for my AF to find it's way.

So I guess my rather odd question is: Are there any weak points with the 1Ds mk III? Any chinks in the armor? Have been eyeing the D700 but they don't come with EF mount, do they?

I doubt that there would be any disadvantages to the 5D, other than the larger size of the body and files (upgrade in disk space to handle the larger files).

I am picking up a 1D3 on Monday, to not replace my 5D, but to be a gap fill for some of the 5D's short comings. I have shot sports with the 5D, and the center point being good, I had a lot of keepers, but we all know that action is not its strength. So now I will have the 1D3 to fall back on when I need the 45 point AF, weather sealing, 10FPS.

I am really thinking of the 1D3 as a backup to the 5D. The 5D's images are that good, but it will be nice to have a body with almost as good IQ in the bag for when I need it.

The main drawback of the 1Ds III is ISO ability. It does not handle high ISO very well.

it can (acceptably) handle up to ~1600 from what I have seen...if you need to shoot 3200+ a lot, buy a 5D mark II (that thing with an 85L on it was night vision).

I'm happy with the way my 5D1 handles ISO noise, is the 1Ds3 worse than the old 5D at high ISO?

dkspook wrote in post #9265507
I'm happy with the way my 5D1 handles ISO noise, is the 1Ds3 worse than the old 5D at high ISO?

From the reviews that I have read, handles high ISO about the same as the 1DsII, which is about a half to full stop worse than the 5D Classic.

ISO 1600 is pushing it on the 1Ds III IMO... ISO 800 is the highest I consider usable

you guys gotta be kidding... I have had 2 x 5dc and I have the 1dsmk2 and the 5dmk2 - they both kick the 5dc in the iso dept. Im only guessing that the 1ds3 is even better than the 1ds2.... However my dear danish friend... if i were you I might be looking at a 1dmk4 rather than a 1dsmk3 - file size is still good and if the af is as good as it were on my 7d its better than the 1dsmk2 but not really much. Nothing that you would really notice. - If you are spending ALOT - maybe get 2 x 1dsmk2. No worries in low light af and can double up on lenses...

@ lamont - what good is night vision if you cant focus... (5d2 - terrible AF)

I really don't want another crop sensor... I like my 50mm as a 50mm and I like my 16-35 wide as hell.

Here's a thought: I'll borrow a 1Ds III and an ST-E2 transmitter. Put the ST-E2 on the 5D and do a shootout in darkness. This was shot in REALLY poor light, so I had to use a small flashlight for AF assist... I like my everything about my 5D, except the AF. If I can solve that problem with the ST-E2, I could buy two of those and another 5D. Perhaps a Mk II, if funds allow.

dkspook wrote in post #9265507
I'm happy with the way my 5D1 handles ISO noise, is the 1Ds3 worse than the old 5D at high ISO?

No, not by a long shot. I've used both, unlike most of the people who are going to jump in and praise their 5Ds. The 1DS3 is a much better beast, and for the price, it should be.

been using 1ds III for a year or so...handles ISO 1600 and 3200 (rarely needed) just fine.

it's not much different than the 5d II (which i owned as well).

It renders skin tones much better and the AF is worth it alone as it blows the 5d I and 5d II out of the water.

Try having a bride walking down the aisle of a dimly lit church and your camera will not AF.

It won't happen on the 1ds III.

+ you can run two memory cards and record images to each card for backup.

Some links to compare it to other cameras!
1Ds III at 3200
http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157622953001117/
5D II at 3200
http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157623077646168/
1D IV at 3200
http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157622953002465/

The 1Ds has so many advantages over the 5D, I would not hesitate dropping an extra 1500 or so for a used one vs a new 5D.....

Huh? High ISO is excellent on the 1Ds3!! I found it pretty much even at 100% with the 5D, but when scaled down to 5D file size, it's better.

The only disadvantages of the 1Ds3 is the size and weight, which affects portability and the likelihood of bringing it along for non paid work.

I also find that 3200 as a ceiling is limiting at times. Sometimes, 6400 is really useful, which my 1D3 and D700 have. I've never found I needed more than 6400 though, so if it had just one more stop of ISO, I think it would be the absolute more perfect camera for me, and I'd have NO reason to ever upgrade until it falls apart.

Though well exposed 1600 files can be nicely pushed two stops. The raw pixel quality is quite astounding.

eigga wrote in post #9266589
ISO 1600 is pushing it on the 1Ds III IMO... ISO 800 is the highest I consider usable

ok, either you have extremely high standards or you are doing something wrong. from my brief experience with the 1DsmkIII, its high ISO is almost as good as the 1DmkIII and that is simply outstanding.

i will tell you this. if you are going to get a 5d II, then don't even bother trying out a 1D series camera. Once you see what canon's AF system is capable of and aren't using it, you will be highly disappointed.