linesplice wrote:
I understand the MK3 is a great camera, but it's $8K vs. the $4K of the D3, right?
The D3 is $5k, not $4k. If you add a 14-24 to that, it'll end up costing you about $6550 for this setup.
For landscapes, the 1Ds2 will definitely give better results than the D3, however for landscapes the 5D gives you great bang for buck and you can buy a lot of glass with the left over money.
EOSDNG wrote:
I would suggest you get the Mark III @ ISO 3200. The D3 has imho insufficient high iso quality. I shot with the D3,did not likte the ISO performance. To much in camera noise reduction.
Why do some people always suggest a camera model that the OP is not even interested in and did not ask about
......... if picking up a used 1DsII .............
