Ben, I wouldn't expect your camera's viewscreen to be as nice as an expensive monitor. But, it's only for reference and live view focusing. If it doesn't look as sharp as the big monitor, simply get the live view to be as sharp as it can on the small screen and know that that is the sharpest point to be had. My eyes are no better, but when I think it's the sharpest I can see, I know it is there and will be good later at the home workstation. After an hour of live view focusing, my eyes are fatigued and I go on a little faith!
There were only a few things that bothered me about the 1Ds3: playback review times, RAW buffer / slow FPS, amp glow at ISO1600/3200 and LCD resolution.
I still think it has superb IQ.
AF on my 1st copy was crooked. The second copy had perfect AF.
IMO the cam was designed for the studio (maybe even to counter digital MF at the time). For events I prefer the 5D series.
pcunite wrote:
Ben,
Have you wanted or considered the 5Diii?
I am actually considering the 6D. I can get it for about the same price I could sell my 1DS-mk3 so just a trade. I am struggling with the trade offs. Better high iso and live view for the 6D. 1 series stuff for the 1ds3.
I just can't imagine anything that would make me do that.
It's like swapping a 5DII for a Rebel.
It is a tough thing to contemplate. I never would have gotten a 1DS3 had I known the 5D2 was coming. I just wanted 21mpixels (30 was what I was hoping for at the time). I never really needed a pro body, just pixels. But since then, I have learned that lenses are the real limiting feature for my needs. I have my lenses now.
I could certainly understand having both, that would cover you for anything and give you a backup, but I wouldn't sell my 1Ds3 for a prosumer model of any kind
dhphoto wrote:
I could certainly understand having both, that would cover you for anything and give you a backup, but I wouldn't sell my 1Ds3 for a prosumer model of any kind
I can only do it by selling. The real weakness at the moment is moonlit scenes calling for more than ISO800 and long exposures. I suppose I have to decide if I really want to do it.
I had 2 landscape/seascape keepers last year and that's a stretch so I am also considering a new hobby.
I shoot wildlife and love using the 1Ds Mark III whenever I can because the file quality is simply gorgeous. There's more tonal dimension than the 1D Mark IV in my opinion and I hardly have to do anything with the files. It's the body I choose for wildlife/people portraits, scenics and macro. I never felt that this body had quirks, only that it has slower fps than my 1D4. Note: I always over exposure by .5 - .75 stops and pull exposure back in Lightroom for the mood that I want. This maximizes the amount of pixels to work with.
ben egbert wrote:
I can only do it by selling. The real weakness at the moment is moonlit scenes calling for more than ISO800 and long exposures. I suppose I have to decide if I really want to do it.
For tripod mounted stuff like that why not a used 5DII and keep the 1Ds3? You hardly need a new 6D for that, the 5DII would do you just as well, if not better
The 5d2 and 1ds3 have too much noise above ISO800 and amp glow at 20-30 seconds. The 5d2 does have a better LCD system, but I think the 1DS3 has cleaner files and better shadow recovery.
If I decide not to do moonlit shots seriously, the 1DS3 is good enough as is.
Improvements are incremental. I want to try some night landscapes which I can do local. The other option is to spend 40-50 grand on a camper so I could stay on the road long enough to improve my odds for decent sky's when at national parks or other icon places. That is not really an option, just the only other alternative.
Anyway, the 5D2 was never an option. The 6D is merely a consideration. The 5D3 is also a consideration if the price drops enough and the 1DS-mk3 retains enough resale.
I really like the sharpness, rich color, and contrast of the 1D-series, especially the 1Ds2 and 1Ds3. Particularly with many Canon L lenses.
Here are some shots from today that I'm partial to the these image characteristics. Granted, I'm a little prejudiced due to the subject being close to home. Today had the lovely Southern California "winter" light following showers, about mid-morning. Not too much to do in PP but sharpen and make minor adjustments in exposure and contrast range.
The 1Ds3 - along with pretty much all 1D-series bodies except the 1DX - suffer from major amp glow. The 1Ds3 gets the cake from showing amp glow even on normal properly frames at ISO 3200 (just try the "right" frames, as Daan will attest). So if you're into night shots, the 5D2, 5D3, 1DX, and allegedly 6D is the way to go, where the 1Ds3 is decisively not the way to go.
Stan -- Does glow of the 1Ds3 affect lower ISO 100/200 for typical twilight shots, 30 to 120 seconds? I tried it once before successfully, so it seems fine.
I've used a 5D @ ISO 800 for twilight, and it was fine except for its chunky noise.
Today had the lovely Southern California "winter" light following showers, about mid-morning. Not too much to do in PP but sharpen and make minor adjustments in exposure and contrast range.