Go with the 1DIII. I regretted selling the 1DIIN for the 1DIII when i first got it, but after the sub-mirror fix, I preferred the 1DIII. The following are much better on the 1DIII:
-better IQ
-high ISO performence is much better
-user interface
-sensor cleaner is a hugh advantage (I used to spend a LOT of time cloing dust on the 1DIIN, while i still do get dust on the 1DIII sensor, it is much less of an issue then the 1DIIN).
-like the larger LCD (although the new 5DII high rez lcd is MUCH better)
-I like the highlight tone priority mode on the 1DIII
-better control over AF (using custom functions/joystick/AF start)
I don't shoot much sports anymore, so i can't comment on AF performance between the two cameras.
After using the 1D Mark II/N for 2 years, I upgraded to the Mark III, and it was the biggest improvement in camera technology for me, ever. The upgrade was even bigger for me than going from the DRebel to 20D, or 20D to Mark II/N.
The biggest improvements for me are:
- ergonomics (slight change but enough to notice)
- battery - the new battery lasts forever (well, easily 3,000 clicks), and no more memory effect/discharging cycles. Also, the smart battery features (like number of shots per charge) is fantastic. And the battery is so much smaller and lighter. I love it
- LCD - the new LCD is bigger, and more importantly, more color accurate than on the Mark IIN (I hated the blue cast on that old screen). The new screen is also better on sunny days. The resolution isn't quite what the new LCD's are, but it's not that big of a deal to me. I can still easily tell if a shot is in focus or not
- customization - the custom function set on the Mark III is much bigger, and more useful than on the Mark II/N. Things like being able to set min/max aperture and shutter speeds on the fly are so useful
- CLEAN - the Mark III is about 1 stop cleaner than the Mark II/N out of camera, but I find that I can do much more processing to the 14bit Raws before noise is evident than on the older cameras. Additionally, the noise is very film like... no more banding as could occur on the Mark II's. I have a kick-a$$ custom action somebody engineered for the 1D Mark III that refines Neat Image's profiles, and fine tunes NR on every tonal level. The output is just amazing. Even heavily processed ISO6400 images are crazy clean and detailed. Results are as good if not better than the 5D2 or any other camera out there.
- low light AF - the Mark II/N's were not great focusers in low light. The Mark III is faster than anything I've ever tried, Canon or Nikon.
- sensor cleaner - it's not a gimmick, it actually works really well.
Those are the biggest differences for me, but there are more I can't think of right now.
Having said all that, if you are mainly shooting outdoors, the Mark II/N's will do just fine. They are arguably just as good in daylight as the Mark III. However, the customization of the Mark III make it more enjoyable to use (the ability to setup parameters for a custom AUTO ISO function is one of my favs).
go for the better (faster) glass, carolyn. on your present camera, i believe you'll see a significant improvement in IQ than today due to the ability to shoot at higher s/s and lower iso as well as what a lens like the 300/2.8 non-IS will do for you, resolution and color-wise.
IMHO, if you can find a used MKlll without any AF issues, it should be a no-brainer. Assuming your swimming images are usable with the 100 - 400 f5.6, the better ISO performance with the MKlll will get you that much better results. This way you can have your torte and eat it too.
GeneO wrote:
The 5d is not all that well suited for wildlife shooting though Bobby.
Gene
I agree but she only mention shorebirds. As long as she doesn't plan to do BIF's I think 5d should be more then enough for stationary birds. For most shorebirds you got to lie low and wait and wait till them come closer to you.
seems to me the perfect combo right now is the 5D markII and a 1D-markIIn....best of both worlds for the cost of a markIII when new....at least that is how I am going....inddors the 5d markII is perfect for me and out doors for all fast moving sports etc the markIIN covers me....if i had to have just one camera it would be the markIII because of its ability to shoot low light and its ability to shoot action and sports but given the drop in prices for the 1D-markII series the combo seems to me to be the best bet!
bobbyz wrote:
I agree but she only mention shorebirds. As long as she doesn't plan to do BIF's I think 5d should be more then enough for stationary birds. For most shorebirds you got to lie low and wait and wait till them come closer to you.
I read that was "this months" trip. It is limiting for wildlife. It is a tough decision as there is no one fit matches all in this case but I am sure Carolyn will figure out the best compromise for her.
GeneO wrote:
I have both (IIN and III), but have only had the III for a couple of weeks. They are both good cameras. The III is better in many aspects: LCD (better than the IIN, much much better than the II), ergonomics of buttons and menus (e.g. you don't have to hold two buttons pressed while turning a wheel to change the ISO like you do on the II), a few more MP, better IQ and higher ISO performance, much improved low light AF, Micro Adjust, better battery. The price is good on a used II now, the 3 can be had for ~$3725 or less new.
I'm in the exact opposite boat from Gene. I recently acquired a IIN as a backup for my 1D3. Although, I can't say that I have seen any significant IQ difference between the two bodies (and that observation may change over time), I definitely agree with everything else that Gene pointed out. I have had absolutely zero AF issues with my blue dot MkIII, and I'm not sure how much of a gamble you would be taking if you bought one (but I have to acknowledge that others have had a very different experience than I have). For me, the ISO performance is one of the biggest differentiators between my IIN and III. I would be remiss if I neglected to mention how amazingly good the AWB is on the MkIII. You can go from outdoors to indoors without making any manual adjustments and it can nail both settings accurately. It's impressive.
