I am looking into getting a new body. I currently shoot a 7D and I want a 1D series with super fast, super accurate AF, and just incredible performer all around. This will mainly be used for bird photography. I know lots of other wldlf photogs who use the mk 4 and really love it, they say it's a huge step up from the mk3. Just wanted to get people's thoughts here.
I'm sure the 4 is better, but how much? (FYI looking at test shots in a controled setting does nothing for me, it doesn't tell me how the camera performs in the field.) So is it worth spending the extra $1500 for the mk 4 (for someone who doesn't have a lot of money to throw around). The whole blue dot thing with the mk 3 makes me nervous, but I'm considering it just because it's so much more affordable(I'll be buying used). What do people who've shot both have to say about this? Especially like to hear from folks who've used both cameras for BIFs or anything similar.
The 1D3 is one of the best bang-for-the-buck bodies out there. But if money is not an option, go for the 1D4.
To be fair, I've only used the 1D3 and have found the AF to be awesome (not a blue dot copy). I favored it much more than my (now sold) 7D despite always being focal length limited. The 7D is something like a 45mp camera based on FF...the 1D3 about 16. But I always grabbed the 1D3 anyways. It was just...better.
I am with the others. If money is not a big issue, goes for the Mark IV.
I own both Mark 3 and Mark 4. In term of Image Quality, I like them all. But for small birds or bird with distance, Mark IV give you more pixel to crop. With the AF, I like the Mark IV. Also, the Mark III has only 19 selectable AF point where as Mark IV has 39. I find that for some bird composition, 39 points give me more choice to lock it fast when birds are perching.
AI Servo of Mark IV is pretty fast even with the busy background. Mark III is no doubt a darn good Pro body but I sold mine and just keep Mark IV for now.
OP - dSLR's depreciate. If you don't have lots of money to throw around just get the 1d3, keep the money, or buy glass with it. Yes, the 1d4 is better, but the 1d3 is really damn good. For a $1,500 camera it is FANTASTIC! You will love it and you will likely never want anything but a 1-series ever again.
I have both cameras under your consideration. This includes the matter of AF with the 1D3.
The 1D3 is, in fact, a real bang for the buck IF YOU GET ONE THAT WORKS AS ADVERTISED! To that end, find one from a dealer who offers a refund or exchange in case things don't go well.
I do appreciate the advice, everyone. Any thoughts on whether the used market price for mk 4 might go down any more, any time soon? I know the 1DX is the new big thing, but it's not a 1.3 crop. Anyone heard rumors about a true mk 5 coming out? i would suspect if such a mk 5 came out that there would be a surplus of used mk 4's on the market (and this would drive price down in the used market).
ashley138 wrote:
Anyone heard rumors about a true mk 5 coming out? i would suspect if such a mk 5 came out that there would be a surplus of used mk 4's on the market (and this would drive price down in the used market).
No. There will be no mark 5.
You can get a 1D3 in super A+ condition for $1500, while a 1D4 in fantastic condition is going to go for probably at least twice that and maybe much more.
Having owned both, while agree the 1D IV is a better camera, there's little in it other than extra res and much faster card writes and the much better rear LCD. 1D III is sensational value and IMO the best pick of any Canon for the money.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Having owned both, while agree the 1D IV is a better camera, there's little in it other than extra res and much faster card writes and the much better rear LCD. 1D III is sensational value and IMO the best pick of any Canon for the money.
Have you considered 5DIII? Better AF than IV per users who have had both and more pixel density than III and very very useable ISO 3200 for BIF. I am new at bif but the 5DIIIs 6FPS and AF with 300 f2.8 + 2xIII is very useable.
thedutt wrote:
Have you considered 5DIII? Better AF than IV per users who have had both and more pixel density than III and very very useable ISO 3200 for BIF. I am new at bif but the 5DIIIs 6FPS and AF with 300 f2.8 + 2xIII is very useable.
I've always shot with 1.6 crops and I don't think there's any way I'd want to deal with the loss of length on a full frame. The 1.3 crops more than make up for the small loss of the crop with accuracy and high res. I'm definitely set on the 1.3 crop.
Oh man, this is a hard decision. I continue to vacillate on this, hopefully soon I'll make up my mind.
thedutt wrote:
Have you considered 5DIII? Better AF than IV per users who have had both and more pixel density than III and very very useable ISO 3200 for BIF. I am new at bif but the 5DIIIs 6FPS and AF with 300 f2.8 + 2xIII is very useable.
I have to agree. The 5DIII has made me a believer.
I had a 7D for a while but I had an opportunity to pick up a superb pre-owned 1DIII , and I never looked back. And then I added a 1DIV, and now life is perfect Both cameras deliver the goods with the edge in quality going to the 1DIV at higher ISOs but I doubt you'll be disappointed either way you go. If it were me though, I'd go for the 1DIV...
?