new Canon 1D MKIII - should you buy?

[JSPhoto]

One advantage of shooting the Indy 500 is getting to try new Canon gear out or see the results of new gear and last week I got to see the MKIII and it is simply amazing. It has a very large screen and the screen has something many have been asking for in a digital camera, you can watch the screen and see what you are shooting just like a video camera.
The really amazing thing though about this new camera is the noise, Canon has once again taken a huge leap over all the other manufactuers in noise quality with the new sensor that has less noise at ISO 6400 than Nikons best at ISO 400! Now thats amazing!

My only complaint about the new MKIII is that it isn't heavy enough, it is a 1 1/2 lighter than the previous 1D bodies and looks like the 1D with the 20D feel due to it's weight. I prefer the heavier body, for one I am used to it and it feels better to me.

However I may have to see about getting one of these new beasts just for the low light, high ISO capabilities that will eliminate the need for flash in most gyms I shoot at. I spend $1,500 a year just for batteries so that helps offset the $4500 cost of the new body.

Overall I give the new body a 9 and a :thumbsup:

JS

[JETA]

Ya, I heard the noise is minimal on the MKIII...... Makes me drool.

Wonder how the weight distribution would feel to me. I like the balance with the MK IIn I have when I use my 70-200 lens, but I wonder if less weight would be a better trade off? Wait, it doesn't matter. Even I can't justify buying myself a MK III.

[JSPhoto]

I agree, the MKIIN is perfectly balanced with the 70-200 and 28-300 and maybe 100-400, 400DO and 35-350, however with bigger and smaller lenses that issue gets thrown out the window.
After seeing it I seriously am considering getting one, if nothing else for those dungeons I have to shoot in

JS

[JETA]

Wonder what one could get for a barely used MKIIn? ;)

[JSPhoto]

not near what you have in it.... thats the sad part of it.. and it's too bad they can't upgrade the old bodies.

JS

[MonkeyWrench]

It's getting rave reviews. The photography mag I get practically drooled over it. Like John said the selling points are less noise and ability to shoot in low light. Do you think they made it lighter to handle the weight of a battery grip? It's not in my budget, but it looks to be a great camera. John, price wise how does this camera stack up against the competition? For me the Digital Rebel XT was my next step up. Would this be the next one or would you suggest that only serious pros put out that kinda dough?

[Jimmy B]

Jeta I know someone about 40 miles north of you that would consider your old camera body:-) just no way I could swing it this year:-(
Jimmy B

[JSPhoto]

It's getting rave reviews. The photography mag I get practically drooled over it. Like John said the selling points are less noise and ability to shoot in low light. Do you think they made it lighter to handle the weight of a battery grip? It's not in my budget, but it looks to be a great camera. John, price wise how does this camera stack up against the competition? For me the Digital Rebel XT was my next step up. Would this be the next one or would you suggest that only serious pros put out that kinda dough?

Nope, you don't need a battery grip with these, I have shot for 10 days on one charge, the MKIIN is great in that regard, unlike the old 1D where I had to charge it constantly.

As for whether this would be right for you....it all depends on if your making money or not and whether you can justify it.
Right now I can't do it due to GAS prices....$3.39 a gallon, up .20cents over night

JS

[Homer]

Thanks JS for passing on this information. I've been saving up for this since I heard it was coming out because of the low light mostly. It's nice to hear from someone first hand who has had a chance to shoot it.

Also, have you heard of a release date, other than in May?

Jim

[JETA]

Jeta I know someone about 40 miles north of you that would consider your old camera body:-) just no way I could swing it this year:-(
Jimmy B

Thanks Jimmy. I'm going to do some more research and hit the camera shop soon to have a looksie for myself. Right now we are in the middle of having a pool put in our backyard so I can't afford to make a move in the next couple of months. If I like the Mark III I'd love to have it by Sept for our game at Seahawk Stadium, but I think I'm dreamin'.

[JSPhoto]

Homer,
It appears the official release will be in June, apparently the AP and some select shooters will get them for the 500. Canon has a habit of using the 500 and Super Bowl as testing for new releases of Pro bodies and "L" lenses.

Now I have to figure out which lens I want to use for race day. First I have to find out exactly where I am shooting, a turn, the garage or the pits The first and last are the best possibilities, and the last would be my preference but it depends on getting the "hot pass" :thumbsup: for race day. I already have pit access the rest of the month

JS

[JETA]

JS, you are in big trouble. Can you tell me why I was dreaming about this camera last night?

Do you have the pics you shot? Were you able to try it out in low light?

Does the camera shots get a demo b4 it's released?

God help me. I'm too interested in this camera.:mad2:

[SmartWombat]

I tried it at PMA and I'm a convert.
Lighter (good).
Quieter (good).
Faster (good).
Faster AF (good).
Better AF (good).
Micro-focus compensation per lens (good).
Waterproof flash to fit body (good).

I haven't used on in anger, so I can't say how it'll perform in action.
But the budget is now torn between a 400mm L IS, or the 1DmIII

I think I just have to sell to 20D and the EF-S 10-22 and then raid the piggy bank.
Perhaps sell the L IS 100-400 as well.

[JSPhoto]

JS, you are in big trouble. Can you tell me why I was dreaming about this camera last night?

Do you have the pics you shot? Were you able to try it out in low light?

Does the camera shots get a demo b4 it's released?

God help me. I'm too interested in this camera.:mad2:

#1: I am always in trouble...nothing new there
#2: Ummmm, nope, can't help ya there.... I'd be dreaming about it too but I am too dang tired!
#3: Nope, they were just quickies in the office, and the light isn't too hot there
#4: answered above
#5: I don't know, depends on the dealer and their rep with Canon I guess

I got to see it because Canon is the official camera of the Indy 500 and they have an office at the track.

#6: Guess I'm in trouble again....

JS

[JETA]

the track.

#6: Guess I'm in trouble again....

JS

At least you own it! :yesnod:

Thanks as always for answering my laundry list of stupid questions. You know there'll be more coming!

[JSPhoto]

At least you own it! :yesnod:

Thanks as always for answering my laundry list of stupid questions. You know there'll be more coming!

Thanks JETA

And the only stupid questions are the ones that are not asked - although I may not always have an answer for the ones that are asked

JS

[JETA]

Since stupid questions are welcome.

It uploads pics with USB 2? Am I missing something here? Wouldn't this be painstakingly slooooooooooow?

[JSPhoto]

Since stupid questions are welcome.

It uploads pics with USB 2? Am I missing something here? Wouldn't this be painstakingly slooooooooooow?

It can be, however your better off using a card reader anyway. The only way I use the cable is if I am using the remote software to shoot with, which is great for nature stuff.

JS

[JETA]

Can you show me what kind of card reader you use? I couldn't ever get mine to work with my Canon cameras.

[JSPhoto]

That could be difficult as it's built into my elcheapo E-Machine computer. On my laptop I use a plugin Sandisk card to read them. Never had a problem on any computer using a card reader, I'd check to make sure you have all the drivers installed, thats usually the issue with this type of thing.

JS

[SmartWombat]

With the new firmware release in the USA (but not the UK, boo) some AF issues are fixed, by changing the camera's preference for near/far focus when there is high contract in the background and not in the focus area.

I've also seen reports that hint later manufactured bodies have better AF than earlier, but it's not conclusive by any means.

Looks like the beta testers have been through it, and we have something reliable hitting the shops. I am glad this time my head ruled my heart and I waited.

[JETA]

I'm more then happy with mine. Take that with a grain of salt from someone with not alot of experience. Maybe a teeny weeny bit of backfocusing, but I'm skeptical it's the camera. I haven't had any time to mess with the microfocus or many of the other custom functions.

I was happy to see the firmware for no other reason then it makes me feel better.

My plan was to hang onto my Mark IIn for 3-4 months just because of the Mark III issues I read about. I'm ready to let go of my Mark IIn. There's no need for it any more in my life. In the last two weeks during football camp my plan was to use it. Never once pulled it out. I'm ready to let go of my security blanket. I'm falling in love with my Mark III.

[SmartWombat]

I'm falling in love with my Mark III.

I know I will, when I get mine.

[specradio]

Canon has once again taken a huge leap over all the other manufactuers in noise quality with the new sensor that has less noise at ISO 6400 than Nikons best at ISO 400! Now thats amazing!

Wherever you found that fact, I suggest you don't visit that site anymore because it's definitely not true. That's just spewing BS everywhere in an act to advertise for Canon. I suggest you edit that post because it's not true. ISO1600 would be more reasonable.

EDIT: http://reviews.cnet.com/4326-6501-65...ml?tag=ss_thmb
It actually looks like ISO 3200 on a D200. Whoever gave you that "Opinion" needs to learn how to use a camera.

http://www.pbase.com/image/80756931
That looks really bad.

[livin4lax09]

many have stated (and I agree) that nikons are better at lower ISOs than canons are. It's when they get into the higher ISOs that canon trumps them. But specradio is right, ISO 400 looks much better than ISO 6400.

and in reality, it's really about exposure too. ISO 6400 on a canon correctly exposed or +1/3 is going to look better than nikon ISO 400 underexposed.