I am considering a new body upgrade and curious to see what other people think about the image quality of the 5D as compared to the 1DMarkIII. I read a post on the forum comparing the 5D vs the Hasselblad H3D-II (Link on FM) and was impressed at how well the 5D performed in comparison. I know that there are rumors about a new 5D replacement etc, and for the purposes of comparison I would guess that IF there was a new replacement soon its image quality would be at least the same as the current model.

I currently use a 40D & 30D, and while I'm happy with the performance of the 40D, there are times when I really need better low light performance, and other times when I wish I had 1-Series AF. I typically shoot landscapes/city scenes/architectural, portraits, studio stuff, and fast moving kids... So while sports aren't my thing and I wouldn't benefit from the faster frame rate of the MarkIII, the AF is very desireable. By the same token, I know that the 5D has great IQ with a FF sensor, the low light performance from what I've read in a few reviews seems to be comparable between the two. Can the 1DMarkIII deliver the goods on low light, AF, and IQ similar to the FF 5D?

If and when canon updates the 5D and adds even near 1 series AF, I'll be first in line to buy one. For now it seems like the 5D/1DMarkIII is the only reasonable option right now. I'm curious to hear others honest opinions of both cameras without turning the 5D/1DMarkIII guys against eachother.

I own both.

IQ is similar on both. I'd give the edge in gradients/tone to the MKIII, but not by much. ISO is great on both. When shooting RAW, I can get back blown highlights a bit better on the MKIII.

AF in single shot is great on both...AI-Servo is significantly better on the MKIII (assuming it doesn't show signs of the AF flaw that many of us see under some conditions).

Both are very good cameras. Price is stellar on the 5D right now...although I do expect a new one out sooner than later. Due to the inconsistencies that I have had with my MKIII, my 5D has been my workhorse. I have owned a lot of Canon bodies (including multiple 5Ds and MKIIN) and can safely say the 5D has put more money in my pocket than any camera body I have ever owned...probably all combined.

Don't expect AI-Servo on the 5D to be anything better than 40D though.

FWIW

^^^^^

I own both and give the IQ edge to the 1d3. I agree with apdieb on all points. Additionally the obvious better crop potential of the 5d (more pixles), faster AF of the 1d3, significantly better dust control of the 1d3, full wide angle of the 5d, and weight are other factors.
Oh yeah, and cost.

At hi ISO I rate the Mk III 1 stop faster (3200). At 1600 and lower the 5D has a bit better IQ but you have to look real hard at 200%. The 5D focusing system is primitive and so is the FPS. You get what you pay for with both bodies.

I shot with a 5D for a year and now the 1D3 for the last 7 months. I compared both when I first got the 1D3. Based on that comparison and looking back at the images I have taken, I'd say the 1D3 has only about a 2/3 stop advantage over the 5D at ISO 3200. However, the 1D3 retains color and dynamic range better at ISO 1600 and 3200 then the 5D.

I went to a Calumet store and played around with a 5D and while I thought the images were good, the focusing system really showed its age. I think that while I am happy with the 40D for now, I will wait for for the 5D replacement and decide between it and the 1D MarkIII then, hopefully the MarkIII will have come down a little by then. Does anyone remember what the 5D cost when it was introduced?

5D was $3299 when introduced.

Interesting thread... I've been trying to figure out how I might be able to afford a 1Ds2 instead of a 5D but having seen the prices of used 1D3 bodies I'm thinking maybe that's the better option ($3500 vs. $4K for the 1Ds2). I just have to figure out if I can live with another crop sensor. Can anyone comment on the much-hyped "pop" of the 5D images vs. the 1D3 images?

I never was all that impressed with the 5D, I had 2 of them, now the mark 3 is a different animal... I love it

what wasn't impressive in regard to IQ of the 5D?

What impressed you before the 1DmkIII?

I ask becuase if canon got it's act together (in my mind), depending on april-june announcements too, I'd consider selling both for a mkIII. Prices are dropping daily on new bodies. i just think that's risky dumping two EXCELLENT, proven bodies for one that has issues for almost what a year now?

pipspeak, there is no special pop except in the imagination of some folks... IQ on the 5d is fantastic as is the 1Dmk3-- it boils down to FF vs. a professional body in all regards. There is much more to a D series than just IQ.

mark petri wrote:
pipspeak, there is no special pop except in the imagination of some folks... IQ on the 5d is fantastic as is the 1Dmk3-- it boils down to FF vs. a professional body in all regards. There is much more to a D series than just IQ.


I know... hence my expression 'much-hyped "pop" ' but it would be interesting to get comments on the overall "look and feel" of images. From what I gather on this thread the color, DR and noise characteristics of the 1D3 images surpass those of the 5D so is the FF field of view (and 2MP of resolution) really all the 5D has going for it?

I used the 5d professionally for a little over a year (75k or so images) and tested out the mk3 briefly when it first came out. IQ was pretty much a wash, resolution wise-- 2MP didn't register even when pixel peeking. So IMHO, yes it boils boils to whether you want FFor not-- as that would be the only reason to pick it over a mk3. However, the fact that we're comparing a 3 year old prosumer body/technology at less than 1/2 the price of one of the latest and greatest (AF issues aside) pro bodies, is quite a testament the 5d.

I shoot both canon and nikon, and despite the hype, the 5d competes quite favorably with the d300 as well. IQ wise, it holds it's own against most bodies.

How does the noise compare at ISO 1600?

Something that doesn't seem to be mentioned very often here, is that when comparing a prosumer body to a professional body, there is more to it then the "image quality" or "amount of noise" generated. If you were comparing two race cars and their ability on the track, engine power and acceleration would not be the only two factors to consider. You would also want to compare handling, cornering, balance, and many many other variables.

The 1D series is more expensive, but it is also meant for the professional who may use their equipment very often and very harshly. It's weather sealed, meant to be able to shoot in harsh weather conditions. It writes to two memory cards at once - invaluable when being paid to shoot. It has superior AF, invaluable as well - it is difficult to sell very many blurry photos. It has a fantastic shutter durability - one more step towards having a tough tool for the job. It has a fantastic battery as well (2k+ shots with a 1D MKIII Battery).

There are other customizable settings as well - such as being able to quickly shoot in another mode by pressing a different button, having programmable minimum shutter speeds (not really necessary imo), and much more. The AWB is also seems easier to use and lends itself towards faster manual adjusting of custom white balance settings.

It's options such as the ones I've listed above that you'd really have to think about when deciding if it's worth the extra $$ or not. Some people can live without them, and some cannot.

Choice is yours.

Shane Canfield wrote:
How does the noise compare at ISO 1600?

A while ago somebody (I can't recall his name) posted his findings on the ISO comparison he made between the 5D and 1D3.

He concluded that when you downsize the 5D file to the size of the 1D3 file there is no real difference in ISO performance.

Jimmy, I am fully aware of the specs on both cameras as well as the price. The 5D has the IQ that I'm looking for but not the AF speed or accuracy. By all user accounts, the 1D MarkIII has everything I'm looking for plus a lot of bells and whistles that I will never use and is also reflected in its price. Again if the 5D or its replacement had the same or better IQ, ISO performance, and better AF speed and precision, I would be all over it. But if the 5D replacement is priced at $3200 like the original 5D, doesn't it make sense to get the MarkIII? It's not an easy question all the way around, that's why I asked the question to users of one or both cameras. In the end, I will buy one of the three cameras but I'm not rushing out to buy just yet.

george malamis wrote:
Jimmy, I am fully aware of the specs on both cameras as well as the price. The 5D has the IQ that I'm looking for but not the AF speed or accuracy. By all user accounts, the 1D MarkIII has everything I'm looking for plus a lot of bells and whistles that I will never use and is also reflected in its price. Again if the 5D or its replacement had the same or better IQ, ISO performance, and better AF speed and precision, I would be all over it. But if the 5D replacement is priced at $3200 like the original 5D, doesn't it make sense to get the MarkIII? It's not an easy question all the way around, that's why I asked the question to users of one or both cameras. In the end, I will buy one of the three cameras but I'm not rushing out to buy just yet.

I have used the 5D extensively, but it was a no-brainer to go for the 1D III. The latter's superior handling and balance, better build, sealing, AF capability with 45 focus points, superior metering, higher frame rate and general functionality gave no occasion for doubt. I cannot really tell the image quality apart between the two, but even if the 5D should have the tiniest edge it will give me more opportunities and vastly better function.

Bogatyr

Hey George

I had a couple of 5D's about a year ago. Currently use 1D MkIII and 1Ds MkII. Loved the FF of the 5D but in my experience, the low light focusing and high ISO were far inferior to the MkIII. Additionally, if I am shooting something in really low light, I'll pick the MkIII over the 1DsMkII everytime.

Good luck
Bill

I currently shoot with the 5D and a 1DmkII. (Yes. I paid the $3299 back in 2005 ) I've never been let down by my 5D. it's always been a stellar camera, but I SO MUCH prefer the mkII in almost every respect except for resolution. I'm currently very very tempted to sell both bodies and buy the 1DmkIII. I enjoy full-frame very much but I don't necessarily need it. I'm quite used to and fond-of the 1.3x crop.

It's a tough call. But I can truthfully say the 5D still has amazing IQ in the most impossibly low light situations.

The AF is pretty primitive though....

I just got my 1DMKIII yesterday. Aside from 1.3X crop, the image quality is on par with 5D. I used to have 1DMKII and wasn't satisfied with IQ then.
Side note, the 1DMKIII is much lighter than 1DMKII. The weight is about same as a 5D with battery grip loaded with 2 batteries. That's definitely a plus. Aside from wide angle requirement and shallower DOF, it is hard not to choose 1D III over 5D. Just my first hour with 1DMKIII, I only found the AWB works better with 5D under incident light. For manual focus, Live view just blows the 5D away. The 1DMKIII a better choice overall. As far as low light situation, I don't see 1DMKIII is any worst than 5D. The ISO 6400 is grainy buit definitely works when you needed.

They are both so different. I have two 5D's and a 1DMk3. The 5D is a fantastic camera for the price. I like it's smaller size and weight for use as my personal camera. On many trips I don't bring my 1DMk3. Now when my 1DsMk3 arrives in a week or so, then I will probably retire my 5D's. But I will miss the light weight and small size.

I have shot many 1000's of images with the 5D, Mk III and D3. The primary difference is at hi ISOs. I rate these cameras @ 1600, 3200 and 6400, respectively. At 800 ISO and less IQ is really pixel peeping at the 200% range.

However the ultimate IQ of the 5D seems to be a little better than the MK III and less so when compared to the D3. It really depends on the print size and how much you enlarge. For me the very small IQ difference is swamped by the ISO noise. YMMV.

To me I think the major advantage is it appears that the 5D has a weaker AA filter, because the difference in resolution is pretty significant for such a small jump in MP. It's much more noticeable between the 1D3 vs 5D, than a 5D vs 1Ds2.

They are both extremely excellent cameras (considering the 5D can hold it's own to a Camera much newer).