Currently using a 1DsII and 5D combo, 2nd shooter uses 5D and 20D combo.
Though I carry both, I tend to avoid using the 5D if I can use the 1DsII since I just prefer the feel, speed, focus etc of the 1 series. Also if I ditch the 5D then my second gets two 5Ds to shoot with, which she would prefer (as would I seeing the 20D as 1600....) so there are some good reasons to go for a new body.
So I could pick up a 5DII (too pricey, again not a 1D), another 1DsII (sensible choice, but adds nothing new) or I'm toying with a 1D III. So I'm interested to hear from anyone who uses one for weddings, tried and moved back to full frame, had one and struggled with AF issues etc.
Thanks for all your input - just don't try and sell me on a 5D II - they will be $5000 over here initially and I have no desire to play videographer.
Hi,
I've been shooting for the last 2 or 3 months with a 1D Mk3 and a 5D and love the combo. The 1.3 factor is actually not a pain to use and I manage with a 35L and 135L on both these bodies by swaping when needed so getting equivalent 35, 45, 135 and around 200mm.
Quality wise I must have a great 5 D because I don't see that much of an improvement in IQ but like the colors better with the 1D. Aboslutly love the ergonomics as well like you do. Basically I don't think I needed a 1D for weddings but it's been great so far. the high ISOs are also better than 5D as is the focussing in low light.
All in all I'd recomend it !
last few weddings on my website were shot with this combo.
Oli
The images from teh 1d3 are superior to the files from the 1dsmk2, exceptionally so at higher iso's. But then so are the 5d files. The problem I had was that the focusing systems would deliver sharp images..but not in the correct spot. It, focus on the eye and the actual focus pt would be on the ear. Even the example posted above is soft.
Since switching back to Nikon, much of that has gone away....so if you are gonna switch to a new body, you might want to check out the d700. I was planning on getting the 50d and 5d2....but switched all the way. Its worth a look. It didnt cost me much at all after all was bought and sold.
bb
Brad - I have four bodies, three flashes and fifteen lenses in the Canon system, many of which do not have Nikon equivalents. So Canon it is for me. Plus I don't get on with Nikon ergonomics.
I have to take issue though - 5D files are not superior to 1dsII files - far from it. I'd take the 1dsII files any day, unless we are talking purely iso 3200 here.
I had both...and chose the 5d. Less noise at 800+ was the difference for me. But hey thats cool. I had bunches of glass and 4 bodies too....still its doable. But if you are happy with what you have then there is no reason to switch. I wasnt thinking of switching either, but the 5d2 went in a direction i didnt want to go...and the d700 was the direction i wanted the 5d2 to have gone...exactly. I wouldnt knock the nikon glass till i tried it either....the zooms kick the canon zooms arse handily, and the primes, while most are not yet usm, have image q thats certainly right there. The only notable missing primes are the 24 and 35's. Honestly the 24L i had sat in the bag. For me, the prime (advantage) really is more apparent in the longer f/l's anyway, and the 85 135 105 and 200 primes are all stellar, even though they arent all usm's yet. And yes I had all the L primes.....even the 50L which has the focus shift problem at the 4-6' range and the front element that has the propensity to fall off....nice q/c!!!!
bb
Brad Barr wrote:
I had both...and chose the 5d. Less noise at 800+ was the difference for me. But hey thats cool. I had bunches of glass and 4 bodies too....still its doable. But if you are happy with what you have then there is no reason to switch. I wasnt thinking of switching either, but the 5d2 went in a direction i didnt want to go...and the d700 was the direction i wanted the 5d2 to have gone...exactly. I wouldnt knock the nikon glass till i tried it either....the zooms kick the canon zooms arse handily, and the primes, while most are not yet usm, have image q thats certainly right there. The only notable missing primes are the 24 and 35's. Honestly the 24L i had sat in the bag. For me, the prime (advantage) really is more apparent in the longer f/l's anyway, and the 85 135 105 and 200 primes are all stellar, even though they arent all usm's yet. And yes I had all the L primes.....even the 50L which has the focus shift problem at the 4-6' range and the front element that has the propensity to fall off....nice q/c!!!!
bb...Show more →
The force is strong with this one... he came to the dark side.
Hmm. My opening comment though mentioned moving my 2nd away from using a 20D which I am not so keen on the output from - it stands out against the other cameras as noticeably poorer, so I stand to gain from the purchase firstly in that department as she will get my other 5D.
Then if I prefer the 1D experience I will enjoy using both bodies at my command rather than just one of them. That's a gain.
Thirdly, pedantically, if I perceive a gain to be present then it IS a gain, since my perception is what we are talking about here, isn't it?
We're probably going to purchase two of these next month for a similar reason. We've been using a 5D/30D combo but want to dump the 30Ds and get better low-light focusing from the 1D3s. Since they've now supposedly taken care of the sub-mirror problem that people encountered with the first iteration of the model, it will be very useful for us. While the 5D's image quality is very nice, its focusing capabilities are pathetic.
Sam Obeid wrote:
Dump the 20 and buy a used 5D for your 2nd?
Not the world's worst idea, but as per my original post I find a the 5D a bit limiting to use compared to a 1 series body, so really it's a case of a 1 series of some sort I think.
I shoot with 1d mark III and 5d combo. All I have to say is the 5d has its place in wedding but have left me frustrated many times with its inability to focus in backlit and lowlight situation. The only reason I keep it is because it's an affordable fullframe. On the other hand, the 1d mark III has bailed me out of many tough situations and also allows me to have more creative and technical freedom. Bottomline, I could not imagine doing wedding without it.
I too am passing on the 5DII bandwagon. I can't justify it and am not prone to marketing. It's a great camera no doubt, but not a huge enough leap for me to consider right now.
1DIII and the current 5D are best for now IMO.
1DIII - IQ, Focusing +++ for low light, ISO performance is fantastic, speed, feel.
5D - IQ never ceases to amaze (this body will remain a FF digital classic), light, easy to use.
If budget is tight, don't hesitate to just pick up the current 5D. If you need the speed and focusing, and awesome lowlight performance, then definetly 1DIII.
I should mention I use the 1DIII and my D3 side by side. 5D is a back up or second to the 1.
olivierb wrote:
Hi,
I've been shooting for the last 2 or 3 months with a 1D Mk3 and a 5D and love the combo. The 1.3 factor is actually not a pain to use and I manage with a 35L and 135L on both these bodies by swaping when needed so getting equivalent 35, 45, 135 and around 200mm.
Quality wise I must have a great 5 D because I don't see that much of an improvement in IQ but like the colors better with the 1D. Aboslutly love the ergonomics as well like you do. Basically I don't think I needed a 1D for weddings but it's been great so far. the high ISOs are also better than 5D as is the focussing in low light.
All in all I'd recomend it !
last few weddings on my website were shot with this combo.
Oli...Show more →
My experience is similar shooting with 1D3 and 5D. I usually run the 1D3 with the 85L and that combo just rocks my socks. I usually have the 35L on the 5D. Being able to change focal length by ~30% is pretty helpful.
I have the combination of 1d MarkIII+5d. I love the ergonomics of the 1d3, but all my favorite pictures come from 5d. I don't know exactly what it is, but 1d mark3 is just not there. I had 2 mark3s but ended up selling one and keeping my 5d. Now got the Nikon d700 to try. Everything is awesome, but the ergonomics is not up to the 1d mark3. In perfect world, I would have my 5d integrated into the 1d Mark3. Before someone tells me it sounds like 1Ds Mark3, I tried that one too. 5d's consistency wins, but then again, focus in low light sucks!
Not to hijack the thread, to those who tried both, how does the D3 handling compares to the 1D3? I am wondering if my hands were meant to carry Canons only or maybe I am too used to it so time using the Nikon would make the difference. I really want to like Nikon, but...
I shoot with a 1DIII, and a 5d combination. The 5D is the backup to the 1DIII. If I could justify two 1DIII I would ditch the 5D in a heatbeat. My dream combination is the 1DIII and the 1DsII(yeah the 1DsIII would be nice but thats just overkill for me)
Victor S wrote:
Not to hijack the thread, to those who tried both, how does the D3 handling compares to the 1D3? I am wondering if my hands were meant to carry Canons only or maybe I am too used to it so time using the Nikon would make the difference. I really want to like Nikon, but...
If you need a push Victor, here it is. Get the D3. No regrets.
IQ, noise, FF, speed...My hands feel at home. Of course, takes time to get used to anything unfamiliar.
