RogerC11 wrote:
If I were to vote, I would've voted for the 1diii also. It's killing the "comptetition" so to speak haha.
I think that the proof that the choice of the 1D Mark III is valid is that, 5 years later, every time the camera is brought up in a forum discussion, the controversy is awakened. And there are even more than hints of that right here in this thread and ones that I suspect will grow. It isn't possible to say that the focus on one's 1D Mark III worked well without having others jump in to bash the camera (and those who really enjoyed using it).
Because outside of a largely improved AF, the shadow noise is no better than the 5D2 and a hell of a lot worse than the D800 and *only* 22 MP... In a lot of ways its a 5D2 with better AF, 6FPS, and dual cards (one of which isn't high speed)... seems like a rather marginal improvement for nearly double the price... Just sayin'..... I still love the camera, but I loved my 5D2 too at $1400 - $1700 less - even with its crap AF :-)...
5d3 because all of the sudden everyone became d800 envy and passed over a completely awesome camera that everyone pretty much writes off as a 5d2 upgrade (like the guy above me)
Megapixel didnt matter much before the d800 was released and all of the sudden people can't get enough of it as if their quality of photos depends on it
I wasn't part of this board when the 1D3 AF controversy was exploding. I have only seen the nebula following the supernova, and it must've been one massive blue giant of a star.
My vote for the biggest controversy since I have been a regular visitor was 5D2 due to the combination of AF complaints and banding complaints.
Oddly, I saw my way through to navigate the chaos and now own a 1D3 and 5D2 and thoroughly enjoy them both!
Canon D30, the $2,000, 3 MP DSLR, and the start of about 5 years of "film vs. digital"
"Film has XX megapixels, it will take a 200 MP sensor to replace ..." etc. Lots of theory.
Amazing what people could not see with their own eyes due to "vested interest." (And I am an old school film guy too, since 1974 or so in high school.)
That was more at Luminous than here I think. Mr R yanked peoples chains a bit by making certain claims.
Even the 4x5 film guy that hated me in 2002 is now quite happy with his 5D2 though.
I agree about the EOS 650/620 cameras. This was an entirely new system without backwards compatibility for the most part (though Canon did make a little-known adapter to allow use of FD super-tele lenses). If you wanted to stay with Canon, you had to totally reinvest. In hindsight, switching to an all electronic mount was a very gutsy foreword looking move by Canon. The EOS-M is a little bit like this, being the first 'new' interchangeable lens system from Canon since the EF mount (I don't think EF-S qualifies as such). I suspect current EF lenses adapted to it will never perform amazingly (for AF) and will be large, but at least the electronic mount allows some compatibility. The photography market is more diversified now across more format segments and the EOS-M is not a wholesale disruptive change.
As for Canon in the last decade, I would definitely say the 1DIII. Its problems and the 'coincidental' release of the D3 that it hastily preempted caused a lot of former Nikon users to switch back, and I'm sure, also a lot of Canon users, reversing a lot of the momentum Canon built with the 1D/1Ds and Mark II versions. I still have the two I bought, and when they were my primary cameras, they were at Canon for servicing more often than any other camera I've owned. Though I had many problems with them, I also really liked them when they worked, which was most of the time, excluding bright sun, hot weather sports photography. I think it's only now with the 1DX that Canon has somewhat recovered face and regained the confidence of high profile users in the sports/news market by making a clean break from the 45-point AF design and proving that the new 6-point system is a real improvement.
I voted 1D III, checked the results and yep there it is with a huge lead over everything else.
Personally I'd love to get one. The prices right now (thanks in part to its bad rep) are superb and I keep getting tempted, but a used 5D II would make more sense for me right now.
Because outside of a largely improved AF, the shadow noise is no better than the 5D2 and a hell of a lot worse than the D800 and *only* 22 MP... In a lot of ways its a 5D2 with better AF, 6FPS, and dual cards (one of which isn't high speed)... seems like a rather marginal improvement for nearly double the price... Just sayin'..... I still love the camera, but I loved my 5D2 too at $1400 - $1700 less - even with its crap AF :-)...
+1. IMO those are the 1D mkIII and the 5D MkIII. MkIV versions seem always to top the predecessor MkIII......
Aug 24, 2012 at 06:50 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Why do so many people here name all Canon bodies like 5Dii, 1Diii and 1Dsii
Instead of 5DII, 1DII and 1DsII
Or even 5D2, 1D2 and 1Ds2
Because the AF system in the 1D MkIII sucked, and the 5D III is just a 5D II on AF steroids.
retrofocus wrote:
Yeah, this is a huge problem to be concerned about with naming bodies "right".....OMG.
So it doesn't matter if all people don't understand what body they talk about ? The first times I was reading about a 5Di or 1Dii I didn't know what they talked about. And I know it's the same for a lot of other people that don't have English as their natural or first language.
And obviously it was a problem for you also with your first answer
