I'm wondering how many out there are using something other then a 5d. Has the 1d mklll broken into the wedding world.
I ask because I am looking into the 1d mklll as an all around body as I don't believe Canon will give the (if ever) 5d up-grade pro AF. I need better AF, but love the look and texture of the 5d.
Mhen mine works its great, unfortunately I have had so many screw ups with it, I am afraid to use professionaly. It just sits in my bag waiting for me document the problems with it and take it back to Canon.
It ruined some potentially very nice shots for me which was when I learnt that I can not use mine succsesfully with fast primes.
I do not have words to describe how bitterly dissapointed I am with my MkIII.
Canon resolved the minor issues with my MKIII in the mirror fix. I shoot a couple of 5Ds and the MKIII. The 5Ds are the portrait cameras and the MKIII does the lions share of the wedding. I love the images with it. People are whining about a new 5D, but the combo of the 5s and the MKIII is about the perfect wedding toolkit for me.
deewaltguy wrote:
Canon resolved the minor issues with my MKIII in the mirror fix. I shoot a couple of 5Ds and the MKIII. The 5Ds are the portrait cameras and the MKIII does the lions share of the wedding. I love the images with it. People are whining about a new 5D, but the combo of the 5s and the MKIII is about the perfect wedding toolkit for me.
Can some one speak to the picture quality of the mklll compared to the 5d? Do you find the depth and feel one often see in the 5d shots. I know its hard to describe.
My Mark III with 24-70 and a 5d with 16-35 II get the majority of use for weddings. Swap a fisheye for the 16-35 on the 5d and put a 70-200 (or 135 2) on the Mark III for some setups and you are golden.
I haven't had any issues with my mark III from wildlife to weddings to indoor/outdoor sports - it just works. And, from my time with a mark II/III, 20d, 30d, and 40d, along with the 5d, the 1 series just has a feel when using them that isn't really reflected in spec sheets.
As for the files, I find the mark III shots hold up a little bit better in post, esp. when you need to recover highlights, or ease shadows. Otherwise, I can't tell them apart.
Been wondering about this myself, currently shoot with a 1ds mk1. Although the 1dIII is a step down megapixel and crop factor wise I'm guessing it's a bit step up in terms of noise and other quality??
I'm a bit worried my lenses wouldn't really match the 1.3x crop factor or else I'd be tempted tp upgrade...
I currently shoot with 1d Mark III with a 5D for wedding. I have to say that the 1d Mark III will give you better image quality when shoot in low light situation. I've shot stuff at ISO 3200 in really dark situation and the result was great. I have always been disappointed with the 5D's inability to focus fast in low light situation. My 1d Mark III does this much better. Plus I really like the 45-point focus system. It's great if you're doing a lot of selective focusing work.
