canon 5d mk3 vs canon 1d?

[mollycusack]

Hey everyone,

Pardom my ignorance when it comes to tech related camera things!

I am a photographer, but I have come from a fine arts background and am not technically inclined.

I currently have a Canon 5d Mk1, yes I am aware that it is pushing on old age the poor dear! It has been fantastic to me.

I also have a 50mm 1.8 and a 70-24mm 2.8, I love both my lenses.

Need to upgrade camera body though!

Currently trying to get into more freelance work, and I have advertised with a wedding magazine- am expecting more jobs when it is released! Would like to upgrade hopefully soon.

Would love any feedback you can provide me with!

Also, I intend on sticking with Canon.

Thanks for your time!

[markmullen]

Depending on what you want to spend in my opinion the 1Ds mk2 is the best value for money right now, bombproof build quality, great AF and IQ. They're looking very cheap now.

I have one as a backup to my 5D mk3 and it is still a great camera. The only thing that persuade me to get rid is when I upgrade to medium format digital when I'll use my 5D mk3 as a backup.

[JeanMichel]

Hi,
I can't tell you about the mark3 or 1d, but I can tell you that i found moving from the 5d to the 5d2 to be most worthwhile: no more spending too much time cleaning the sensor, and larger files. If I were you I would probably keep the 5d -- it is probably of better value to you as a backup than as a financial trade -- and would consider a well maintained used 5d2. That might leave you with some budget to purchase one or more better lenses. For my 5d2 I use a Canon 24-105, a VC 20, and a VC 40.
Jean-Michel

[Ken Bennett]

The 5D Mark III and the 1Dx have very similar image quality (excellent!) and autofocus systems. Either one would be a significant upgrade from your original 5D. Like moving from an old Chevy to the Space Shuttle. The 1Dx is built to withstand much more abuse than the 5D3, including bad weather, sand and dust, and constant pounding. It also has a built in vertical grip, and can record audio tags associated with your photos (very useful for captioning.) The price difference for these features is, of course, also significant.

The new 6D is also a full frame camera with excellent image quality. It has a simpler autofocus system much like your 5D. It's smaller than the others, and much less expensive -- under $2K. It would be an excellent upgrade from your current system, though not as revolutionary.

For the cost of a single 5D Mark III, you can probably buy a pair of 5D Mark II cameras in good used condition. The 5D Mark II is still a very good camera. It has the same AF system as your current 5D, but with much larger files and better high ISO image quality. (I would not shoot a paid assignment -- especially a wedding! -- without two cameras, and preferably three since I am known to screw things up.)

Your lenses are fine, the 24-70 in particular is a good lens. You may wish to look at something like the 135/2 or maybe a 70-200/2.8 as a longer lens which can be useful at weddings.

Good luck.

[woof75]

I wouldn't touch the canon 1ds mark 2. I had one and hated it. Really strong AA filter. I remember renting a 5D and preferring the files as they weren't as soft. They are pretty bomb proof but what are you planning to do with it anyway.. You shouldn't underestimate how far tech has come in the last few years.

[Ken Bennett]

I wouldn't touch the canon 1ds mark 2. I had one and hated it.

+1 on this. The 1Ds Mark II came out in 2004, and a lot has happened in the nine years since. It was an excellent upgrade to the original 1Ds, but current Canon bodies are much better for image quality, especially at high ISO values.

I owned two of the 1D Mark II (the faster photo-J version) and they were amazing cameras in 2004. So much better than the 1D bodies that I owned. But I wouldn't want to use them now. (Sorry, Mark, just have to disagree.)

[Lee Rentz]

I much prefer the 5D Mklll to the Mkll. The high ISO response is better, which could be important at weddings. There is virtually no dust removal problem, which I found to be a real problem with the Mkll. Weather sealing is better. Focus points and speed of focus are vastly better. Placement of switches and buttons is better. I would not invest in an older model camera, unless your budget is limited and you indeed want to buy two (which is good advice for wedding photography).

[SecondFocus]

I have had the 1DMkII, the 30D, the 5D and 1DMkIII. I have also shot the 1DSMkII, 1DSMkIII, the 5DMkII, the 7D. I now have 2 5DMkIII and I think the image quality is just amazing and far superior to any of the others.

[stevesanacore]

I have had the 1DMkII, the 30D, the 5D and 1DMkIII. I have also shot the 1DSMkII, 1DSMkIII, the 5DMkII, the 7D. I now have 2 5DMkIII and I think the image quality is just amazing and far superior to any of the others.

+1

I too have had them all. Canon had a problem with AF on all the preceding bodies up to the 1DX and 5DMk3, I've suffered with them all. The new 5D3 is a winner. If you plan on making a living with a camera, you owe it to yourself to spend a bit more and get a great tool that won't disappoint you or your clients.

[NancyP]

2 5D3s rather than 1 1DX. Save your nerves. You need a backup body if you shoot events. Problem with one body - no sweat, just switch to the other camera, and work out problem after the event. Having 2 identical bodies should make life easier.

6D is a dandy landscape camera, but lacks the sophisticated focus useful for event photographers. I am just an amateur, so I bought the 6D for landscapes and low light, and keep my 60D for birds and macro. (The AF and burst rate are OK but not stellar on the 60D, but I await the 7D2, and frankly, there's a lot to learn in BIF technique and fieldcraft while I wait).

[EgillBjarki]

Two 5D Mark III bodies, 24-70mm II on one and the 70-200mm II on the other can't go wrong!

Most bang for the buck would be to go to the 6D and get the Tamron 24-70mm 2.8. I bought the Tamron just for video, the 2.8 and IS is GOLD for video!

I am sure you will find the IS beneficial if you are covering low light events. But the 24-70mm II has better sharpness and micro contrast.

Hope this helps!