Register · Search · Software · Join Upload & Sell · Hosting

	Moderated by: Fred Miranda
	Username   Password FM Forum Rules Wedding Resource List FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell    Search Used end    Archive 2009 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3

jcolman Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #1 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 I want to upgrade from my 1Dnmk2. Both the 1Ds and the 1D 3 are about the same price. Which camera would you chose? I also have a 5D and I'm really not interested in the 5Dmk2. I need great low light focusing and image quality at high ISO. High FPS isn't that important to me. I also use Lightroom 1.4 and PS CS3 for image processing. Jan 06, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Aberdeen Photo Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #2 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Jim, I have a 1D3 and have shot a 1Ds2 and would say for most wedding work, the 1D3. It is better as higher ISOs and I really like the 14 bit depth and is a great all around camera. Btw, the battery lasts a very long time in this body. They are both great cameras with different strengths. However, if I was shooting 400 ASA and below, the 1Ds2 would be my choice. It would also be better, in this ASA range, for large double spreads in albums. It has great dynamic range, ff look, bigger files size for cropping. For commercial work, I still rent the 1Ds2 over the 1Ds3. Just prefer the look of the files @ ASA 100. Over 400, esp @ 1600, and the tables begin to turn to the 1D3. In the real world of weddings, the 1D3 would be my choice. Tom Jan 06, 2009 at 02:11 PM

deepbluejh Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #3 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 I have to agree with the above post. Sure, the 1DsII is full frame and perhaps very slightly higher image quality at lower ISO, but that is where the advantages end. The 1DIII is more sophisticated in many ways over the 1DsII and hands down the better camera. The only catch is that you have to deal with a 1.3x crop and "only" 10MP. For wedding work that isnt necessarily a deal breaker. Jan 06, 2009 at 02:14 PM

jcolman Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #4 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Thanks guys. You've been a big help. I'm still undecided as I had my heart set on that big 16.7 mp pic but what you say makes sense. My only concern is the smaller 10mp size sensor on the mk 3. My mk2n has nearly the same size sensor and I'm disappointed in the image quality, especially in low light. Is the mk 3 really that much better?? Jan 06, 2009 at 02:20 PM

Aberdeen Photo Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #5 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Is the mk 3 really that much better?? Yes it is Jim. I have owned the 2N and still own a 2 and the 3 is a big step up in IQ. I uprez in Alien Skin Blowup or have my lab do it and the are fine for the larger spreads and prints up to 20x30, at least for my clients. Tom Jan 06, 2009 at 02:35 PM

jcolman Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #6 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Aberdeen Photo wrote: Is the mk 3 really that much better?? Yes it is Jim. I have owned the 2N and still own a 2 and the 3 is a big step up in IQ. I uprez in Alien Skin Blowup or have my lab do it and the are fine for the larger spreads and prints up to 20x30, at least for my clients. Tom Cool. Thanks Tom. Jan 06, 2009 at 02:40 PM

coffee-black Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #7 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Hi Jim: I realize I am in the minority, but when I did my research on the 1DIII, I simply couldn't justify the cost when comparing it to my 1DIIn. I take nothing away from the III, but for whatever reason, the IIn seems to have taken on a lot of negative 'press'...all of which is undeserved IMO. Though I didn't have a great deal of time with the III on my trial, I have also downloaded files from reputable sources and came up with the same conclusion as when comparing the files to my own. Though sites "rave" about IQ, I simply wasn't seeing it on screen and particularly in prints. My conclusion was that from ISO1600 downward, there was no discernible difference in prints or screen viewing. Studio made images were indistinguishable between the two. At ISO3200, the III had about a 2/3 stop advantage on screen, but was hardly noticeable in print. Pushing above 3200 is where the III gained a bit more, in both print and screen viewing. The printing was the great equalizer for me. I kept looking at various prints from both cameras and simply couldn't justify the cost. Here's a link to one of the sources I used-- http://www.imaging-resource.com/DIGCAM01.HTM If you locate the !!!, read down about 2/3 and find the link for full resolution downloads of both the IIn and III. At minimum, you can look at some for yourself. Additionally, I would ask some people to send you some files [if you cannot get a trial use of one] and compare them to your own current files, using your own processing techniques. Again, I realize I am in the minority. I also realize we all have different thresholds for acceptability. But, if I was going to invest that much money in my business, I'd look for a better return. Just my 2 cents. >rw Jan 06, 2009 at 03:11 PM

jcolman Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #8 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 coffee-black wrote: Hi Jim: I realize I am in the minority, but when I did my research on the 1DIII, I simply couldn't justify the cost when comparing it to my 1DIIn. I take nothing away from the III, but for whatever reason, the IIn seems to have taken on a lot of negative 'press'...all of which is undeserved IMO. Though I didn't have a great deal of time with the III on my trial, I have also downloaded files from reputable sources and came up with the same conclusion as when comparing the files to my own. Though sites "rave" about IQ, I simply wasn't seeing it on screen and particularly in prints. My conclusion was that from ISO1600 downward, there was no discernible difference in prints or screen viewing. Studio made images were indistinguishable between the two. At ISO3200, the III had about a 2/3 stop advantage on screen, but was hardly noticeable in print. Pushing above 3200 is where the III gained a bit more, in both print and screen viewing. The printing was the great equalizer for me. I kept looking at various prints from both cameras and simply couldn't justify the cost. Here's a link to one of the sources I used-- http://www.imaging-resource.com/DIGCAM01.HTM If you locate the !!!, read down about 2/3 and find the link for full resolution downloads of both the IIn and III. At minimum, you can look at some for yourself. Additionally, I would ask some people to send you some files [if you cannot get a trial use of one] and compare them to your own current files, using your own processing techniques. Again, I realize I am in the minority. I also realize we all have different thresholds for acceptability. But, if I was going to invest that much money in my business, I'd look for a better return. Just my 2 cents. >rw Interesting read. Thanks very much. Now you've muddied the waters even more! Jan 06, 2009 at 03:29 PM

coffee-black Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #9 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Don't you hate when someone does that! Don't misunderstand, if my IIn was showing signs of wear and thought it unreliable, I'd pick up a III with little hesitation. But, my decision would be based on a need for a camera, not because I thought my overall product offering would be enhanced. Not certain what your needs may be. >rw Jan 06, 2009 at 03:39 PM

jcolman Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #10 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 coffee-black wrote: Don't you hate when someone does that! Don't misunderstand, if my IIn was showing signs of wear and thought it unreliable, I'd pick up a III with little hesitation. But, my decision would be based on a need for a camera, not because I thought my overall product offering would be enhanced. Not certain what your needs may be. >rw My needs are for better pics. I love the mk2n in "normal" light situations and for capturing fast action however I'm primarily a wedding shooter and high ISO, accurate focusing and high quality images are a must. The mk2n just doesn't cut it for me in the image quality department. My 5D produces much better images. Jan 06, 2009 at 03:49 PM

coffee-black Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #11 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 I have no experience with the 5D, so can't comment. I use the IIn for reception images up to 1600, but most are at 800. For me, it works well. But, I have to admit, I like the Nikon focus system much better for receptions. There is an unmistakable delay with the Canon when shooting in low light. I used a D200 until I got a D2Hs. The latter [as much as I hate to write it] puts the Canon to shame in low light with both respective flashes attached and without. Again, download some of the images and ask a few people here to send you a couple of raw files. I'm certain they will. To me, it is the only way to make an educated decision. There are also quite a few places that will rent you a III for about $125/week. Look up 'lens rental dot com. Rodger is a great guy. I have rented several lenses from them and can vouch for them. Best of luck. >rw Jan 06, 2009 at 04:06 PM

atbawrps Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #12 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 jcolman wrote: I need great low light focusing and image quality at high ISO. High FPS isn't that important to me. Then this is why you should go with the 5D Mk II, even though you said you weren't interested in it. I had 3 1D III bodies. I sold 1 and bought the 5D II. I just sold another one and am contemplating either buying another 5D II or selling the other 1D III and using the dough to buy a 1Ds III. Believe it or not, the 1D III may end up being my "backup" camera. That being said, anyone interested in a 1D III with about 10K clicks? Hahah! Jan 06, 2009 at 04:34 PM

asimsoofi Offline Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #13 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 Low light focusing + high ISO = 1DIII FPS can be adjusted based on your needs (S, Single, Low, High). IMO, 5DII cannot match the low light focusing speed of the 1DIII. When you miss a moment because of milliseconds, you'll understand why the speed makes a difference. Most importantly, your style and comfort will be and should be your deciding factor. /asim Jan 06, 2009 at 05:11 PM

jcolman Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On p.1 #14 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 asimsoofi wrote: When you miss a moment because of milliseconds, you'll understand why the speed makes a difference. /asim Hence one of the main reasons I want to stick with the 1D series. I love my 5D and considered the 5Dll but the quickness of the 1D is unbeatable. Jan 06, 2009 at 06:07 PM

sivrajbm Online Upload & Sell: On p.1 #15 · help me decide. 1Dsmk2 or 1Dmk3 How many times has this come up recently? 1DsMk2 if IQ is anywhere in the picture. How high is high iso to you, 800, 1600, 3200? Big beautiful files that clean-up (iso3200 proper exposure is always your friend), sharpen-up and rez-up like nothing short of the 1DsMk3. No problems focusing on mine in low-light but what is low? Jan 06, 2009 at 06:29 PM

	end FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell end

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password   Lost your password?