I know full frame vs crop also I have the 1DMkII N. I thought at first getting the 1DsMkII for everything that the 1DMkII N does not do as a 2nd camera.. Then with the 1DMkIII price dropping a new wrinkle .. Is this the camera that is closer to both? I can't afford the 1DMkIV, that would be the closest. ......Rich
I've had the 1DII, 1DsII, and 1DIII. My current cameras are the 1DIII and 5DmkI. I loved my 1DII and was not very pleased with my 1DsII. Now in fairness, I purchased the 1DsII used and could have had an abused copy, but to my eyes, I always preferred the output from my 5D over the 1DsII.
For those who own and love the 1DsII, good for you... for me, it was not a love affair. In the end, I found my files to require to much post-processing. As for the 1DIII, it has the modern feature set that I really craved. While it's live view is outdated, it is still useful for macro work. The 1DIII also has micro-adjust... this is a feature that I love when using fast primes. The image quality is lovely... I find that the pictures produce wonderful color with a broad dynamic range.
I wish you luck with your search Rich, as it seems that you have been hunting for that second body for an eternity.
cheers,
bruce
How is the 10MB file of the 1DMkIII. I would think the 1DsMkII would have a more workable file with the extra MBs? I have the 1DMkII N and I find I would like a bigger file for enlarging, of course there goes the speed with the 1DsMkII... This is the type thing I shoot... This is with the 1DMkII N http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc150/blackies_owner/_CL_8236_edited-2.jpg
With the price drop I am looking at the 1DMkIII if you think the image quality is as good as going to 1DsMkII's 16MB..Yes, I would love the 1DMkIV better, of course
Rich,
I've enlarged 1DII files to 24" without seeing a loss of resolution. The 1DIII has nicer pixels than the 1DII and handles post processing well. With that said, a 16mp 1DsII has more pixels per feather... if you've got a long enough lens to capture the detail.
For me, the 1DIII w/ it's 1.3 crop is an ideal fit for my 300 f2.8... I'm not sure that you would benefit from the resolution if you don't have the additional focal length to compensate for full frame... this was the case for me.
Yeah, that's right. I sold my 300 after getting the 400mm f/5.6L. The 1.3x is close to full frame though. There would be a loss of magnifacation which enlarging would reduce again with full frame. I liked the resoultion of my 50D, but after getting the 1DMkII N I l the AFwas better and the ability to use the TC on the 400 f/5.6... It went. That is when the 2nd body search began.................
I have been going through the same research process as you recently. I have a 50D and a 1D2, but I want to get another body. I have researched all over the net for words of wisdom, but there seems to be conflicting data.
I hear the 1D3 is better for fast moving subjects: sports, wildlife and the 1ds2 is better for portraits. The 1d3 is also much better in low light settings as I understand.
I guess I get hung up on the resolution question too, but have encountered a couple of discussions where they actually say the 10MP 1d3 has more pixel density if you crop the1ds2 to match the 1d3 frame due to the 1.3 sensor.
I shoot wildlife and landscapes and am still torn with which way to go. As you said with the prices we are seeing on low shutter 1d3's, which i believe will drop even more with the release of the 1d4.
I like you want to have sharp pictures. I wish there were move definitive forums on this. Overall through what I have read it seems that the 1d3 is a better camera for my purposes and I have to just past the issue I have with 10MP of resolution.
Rich Swanner wrote:
Is the quality of the 1DMkIII equal or at least near to the 1DsMkII?
Quality is what sense?
It will all come down to whether or not you can fill your frame with the image. If you are shooting focal length limited and have to crop the heck out of your images, the 1D3 will likely come out ahead, otherwise the higher resolution of the 1Ds2 will compensate for whatever pixel level advantages the 1D3 has.
I have a 1Ds II and I agree that files from it need more PP, the resolution of 1Ds II is still quite amazing when looking at 100%. Never had a 1D III, so can't say much about that aspect.
This guy is the size of your little finger. I do enlarge my shots... I have to remember that when using full frame(had a 5D) to compensate for the 1:1 I had to enlarge more , probably bring the 1DMkIII and the 1DsMkII closer in the image quality .http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc150/blackies_owner/YCL_9175_edited-3.jpg..
I have a 1DMkII, a 1DsMkII and a 1DMkIII. Of the 3 cameras the 1DsMkII is head and shoulders above the other 2. The images that come out of that camera are magical. I think it is every bit the equal of the 1DMkIII in every aspect other than fps and high ISO shots. AF is every bit as fast. With all in camera settings equal the 1DMkIII colors look flat by comparison. Of the 3 cameras the 1DsII would be the last camera to leave my possession. One added benefit of the 1DsII over the 1DIII, given your current gear, is the fact that is uses the same batteries, charger, etc as your 1DIIN. While that may not sound like a big deal, if you travel with your gear then hauling around 2 kinds of batteries and chargers is a real pain.
BTW the 1DsII is more than capable of capturing the hummers you like to shoot.
BTW. The only thing I did to that shot was crop and resize it for the web to show what shots look like straight out of the camera. No color correction or sharpening.
