Timetable for buying a 1DIII: you bought despite the RG reports or waiting for what?

[Asher Kelman]

The 1DIII has so much we want,

• a dynamic range that appears to rival the M8 and the Digital Backs,
  
• larger buffer for more of a chase/ action scene,
  
• greater sensivity with amazingly low noise and
  
• promised revolutionary fast and precise focus.

For me, with fast lenses, this is a dream come true. However, I have not bought, just yet.

What goes into your decisions to buy or not and have you already promised yourself one!

Asher

 

[Nill Toulme]

I ordered one a couple of months ago and my order is still pending, but I have to confess I'm kind of glad it hasn't come in yet. I bought that used 1DsMkII last week to keep myself occupied in the meantime. ;-)

With its improved high ISO performance and better AF in extreme low light, it should be perfect for me. The increased speed, buffer, MP and bit counts are substantial bonuses.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

 

[Dave Witten]

I do horse racing photography sometimes at night with dim light so I bought the M III as soon as I could get my hands on one. I am delighted . I've experienced no AF problems , the low noise performance at high ISO is terrific. Virtually all my race shots are at the maximum frame rate AI servo. I still use a MIIN as a second camera but the MIII is much better for my work.

 

[Tim Gray]

I've followed the controversy in detail, and had one on order since April. Finally one showed up at my dealer in Toronto, and I didn' hesitate - but the severe conditions under which RG exposed the problem are pretty rare for my kind of shooting.

 

[Paul Bestwick]

I had been waiting for an adequate back up to my 1DSMK2 basically since I acquired it. I bought a 300D as an emergency measure which of course I never needed.

The 5D or other 1 series cameras did not appeal to me. But then, Canon released the MK3 white paper. At this point I was interested from the technical perspective but had NO intention of buying one.
As I read through the detail, I was blown away by the specifications & started to question my need to wait for the 1DSMK3.

Ultimately, I decided on the 1DMK3. At this early stage I am using a 2 camera system with the wides on the 1DSMK2 & longer lenses on the mK3. Perfect combination.
So basically, given that these are the tools that I make my living with it really was just a practical choice.

Regarding any perceived problems with the MK3, it has not been an issue I have been concerned with at all.
I am extremely happy with the Canon product & confident in their ability to create a quality tool which would perform at the highest level.

 

[Terry Norris]

mk3

I bought one anyway, I knew I would eventually, I was worried that it wouldn't be a good one after I got it. I know that a lot of the internet problems are from people you haven't used a 1 series camera before and I know they take some getting used to. I haven't tried the AI servo mode yet but the one spot is very good. I'm liking it more each time I use it. I use AI servo at weddings some but haven't used the MK3 at a wedding yet. I may this saturday if I'm brave. The MK2n isn't perfect in AIservo so some improvement would be nice. During processionals I get about a 75% good rate with the MK2n. Terry

 

[Joseph A. Kurkjian]

Other than grandchildren I don't shoot sports but love to shoot the animal kingdom. I'd say about half my "animal kingdom" shots require AI Servo AF.

The m3's high ISO noise performance and 14 bit RAW resolution appeal to me in a big way. I've been shooting a 1DmkII almost from the time it hit the streets and the extra resolution and frame rate of the m3 is a ho-hum to me. Having seen Paul Bestwick's portraits comparing the 1DsII and m3 it is clear to me that the m3's detail extraction will also make it a great landscape camera. I've used my m2/17-40 for landscapes (my other love) and the extra detail afforded by the m3 won't hurt me at all.

I've been an engineer involved in high technology developments all my life and I'm terribly concerned about the problems posted by a limited number of credible photographers; these problems have ranged from AF issues on static as well as dynamic objects. There has been one case of a good m3 camera going unacceptably bad from the standpoint of AF; this "shift" in performance took place over a two week period. Of course, there is also the temperature dependence reported by RG. My take on the "shooter experience" aspect of the m3 issue is different than most folks; seems to me the shooters with zero previous 1-series experience are the ones that report happiness. Most of the unhappy "credible" shooters have been shooting 1-series bodies for quite a few years; in fact they still have 1DII and 1DIIN bodies in their possession and comparing the m3 to their frame(s) of reference is a very easy thing to do.

So, where do I sit? Well, about a month ago I decided to wait six to nine months to see how the m3 plays out. My experience as an engineer listening to many problems just like this (i.e. with mixed apples in the basket) tells me the problem is a design issue that cannot be fixed via firmware (firmware changes can minimize certain aspects of the problem but IMO will never get to the root cause).

So I'm going to wait it out. I have three (had four but lost one) competent bodies and lots of lenses that play perfectly with those bodies and therefore there is no need on my part to rush to what may be a bad judgment. However, I badly want an m3 and if by the end of next week it appears my chances of getting a good m3 will hit 99 percent I'm jumping on the bandwagon BECAUSE I always reserve the right to be wrong and/or change my mind. Unfortunately, right now, looking at polls conducted at other forums and my own short list of credible shooters, it looks to me that the chances of picking up a good m3 is like a 50/50 coin flip; I don't feel comfortable with those odds. Now odds can be deceiving and one must be flexible when it matters; if I had a 50/50 chance to pick up one of the Coors twins ......., well, you get my point.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

 

[Steve Saunders]

I bought one regardless. I'd already paid up front but could have cancelled easily and had a refund if I wanted, like when I paid up front for a Kodak 14n when it was announced and then seen those terrible sample images that Kodak released (anyone remember them?) and I cancelled the order and got a refund. No regrets with the MkIII and I've got a second one on order.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Well,

I was about to purchase the Leica M8 camera because of the superb rendering in B&W and the colors of nature as well as the unimposing form factor. Then the IR issue made me rethink and I'm still on the fence. I like to get cameras that can be tools for years, not coming with design issues from the outset.

I feel a similar sense right now with the 1D Mark III. How long it will take for Canon to figure things out, we don't know. If I need to use the extra sensitivity for low light I'll get one sooner.

Thing is, selling my 1DII will mean only about $2500 for the new 1DIII with a warranty. That's not too bad. So I'd consider the cost of my 1DII is about $800 per year, which is pretty cheap!

Asher

 

[Nill Toulme]

My Mark III order at Dell is showing shipment on 7/30. I'll believe that when I see it.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

 

[Jack Joseph Jr]

I'd like to have one. It certainly would help in some of the places that I shoot. If I owned something other than a 1D mark II N I would have probably pre-ordered one. The N is so good that it's just not worth it to me to replace it with a Mark III. Besides, I'm trying to minimize the number of times I have to shoot in crappy-lit venues.

It sure would help for football and basketball this fall but I calculated that it would make but a tiny little difference in my income while requiring an expense of maybe $2500. I'd rather buy glass as there are two or three lenses that I don't absolutley need but still want.

The biggest reason? It's not full frame. After shooting my 5D I'm totally stuck on real 35mm cameras. There is just a look about them whether shot with a 24-70 f/2.8 or a 300 f/2.8 IS. As terrific a camera that the 1D Mark II N is I'd rather shoot the 5D. Most of my work is done with the N since I shoot sports but that is where the N does its job.

 

[Paul Bestwick]

Hey Jack,

I can relate to your thoughts on the 35mm format. I recall back when I had the D60 & the 1DS came out I immediately bought one as the reduced sensor size of the D60 was totally not congruent with my style of shooting.

All those unwanted in focus backgrounds...... no thanks.
However.... my 300 F2.8L IS arrives on Wednesday & guess what that will be immediately
superglued to ? My MK3 of course.

I have been surprised at the minimal effect on DOF with the crop factor of the MK3. I am very pleased actually. So much so that my 1DSMK2 has been relegated to second camera whilst the MK3 enjoys "most favored body" status.

Jack I reckon that once you try one of these suckers you will be converted.

Cheers,

PB

 

[Steve Saunders]

Yes the 1.3x crop is very much different than the 1.6 of the consumer models.

 

[Ed Cordes]

Crop Factor and DOF

I don't believe the crop factor has anything to do with DOF. The lens focal length and apeture along with the distance to the subject will determine DOF. All the crop factor does is to limit the image to the central area of the full 35 mm frame. A 1.3 crop limits it to the central 66% and the 1.6 to the central 60%. It then gives the field of view of a longer focal length lens. So a 100 mm lens on a 1.3 crop body will have the equivalent FOV of a 130 mm lens, but the perspective i.e. DOF compression effect closest focusing distance, etc. will all be unchanged

 

[Nill Toulme]

I think that's technically correct, but as a practical matter it only goes so far. Consider for example the 7mm lens on my little P&S that "equates" to about a 35mm. Yes, it's still "really" a 7mm lens with all that entails, but as a practical matter it gets used as a 35mm lens (so to speak) with near infinite DOF.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

 

[Paul Bestwick]

If the sensor size does not affect DOF then I would not have made the statement.

 

[Ed Cordes]

If the sensor size does not affect DOF then I would not have made the statement.

I could very well be wrong, but I really don't think the size of the sensor affects DOF. If someone could explain the optics that would make this occur I would appreciate it.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Paul Bestwick]

read this Ed
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

 

[Ed Cordes]

read this Ed
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

Thanks for the link.

Ah! I see we are both right. I was assuming a fixed focal length at a fixed distance. The article states

As sensor size increases, the depth of field will decrease for a given aperture . (when filling the frame with a subject of the same size and distance) This is because larger sensors require one to get closer to their subject, or to use a longer focal length in order to fill the frame with that subject.

So this discussion in the article assumes a fixed perspective and image size so a flexible distance is used. I agree that moving in and out changes DOF. The article explains that to maintain perspective changing distance or changing focal length are required on larger sensors.

My premise was a variable sensor size with fixed distance and fixed focal length. As usual in these cases we have approached the issue from different angles.

I am enjoying this discussion, so if there is additional info please let's discuss it.

Cheers,
Ed

 

[Jack Joseph Jr]

Hey Jack,

. . . my 300 F2.8L IS arrives on Wednesday & guess what that will be immediately
superglued to ? My MK3 of course.

PB

It would be hard to find a nicer lens than a 300 f/2.8. Mine is stuffed in a backpack and headed to Sacramento today for ASA softball. The rest of the junk is crammed into a Pelican 1510.

You're right, the crop factor is not so bad on a 1.3 camera. One thing that I found is that a 1D2N with a 300mm shot vertical is just a little too tight for the far end of a basketball court. The same lens on FF, a 5D in my case, works well.

BTW superglue damages the rubber seal on the lens' camera mount

 

[Paul Bestwick]

jack my 300 came today..... all the way from the USA to Australia in just 6 days. Never ceases to amaze me.
Anyhow, it is a bit of a beast. It may seem like a strange thing to say but I actually find it a little intimidating. I can see that I am going to have to learn HOW to shoot with this focal length. (it is nearly 400 on my MK3)
It will require some serious thought & application. It is times like this I think that you appreciate the technique you have learned over the years. Photography becomes in many ways second nature & it may be that we forget that we have actually developed some serious skills.
I feel that using a lens like this (for my specific application) requires a whole new skill set & should lead to some interesting variation to my usual style.
I am looking forward to the challenge.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I can see that I am going to have to learn HOW to shoot with this focal length. (it is nearly 400 on my MK3)

A nice carbon fibre monopod seems like a natural companion.

Bart

 

[Nill Toulme]

...regarding which, see this thread.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

 

[Ivan Garcia]

Hi guys.
Just got mine today, (after serious consideration of RG reports).
I shoot a lot of macro with my MP-E 65, so , for me, the live view facility, was the main factor in my decision.
Ps:
My trip to Thailand was fantastic, I will post some pictures as soon as I have the time to process them.
I am leaving tomorrow for my yearly trip to Spain. The temperatures will be high, so I am hopping my body does not suffer from the focusing problems reported by RG.