Here are two photos identically shot and identically post processed:
High res versions:
High res versions:
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Do you not think three cameras is overkill? Unless you plan on linking them all wirelessly and trigger them that way two would suffice wouldn't it?
Reach is always good, so I would keep the 1D Mark IV and 1D X and sell the rest and buy new glass.
I like Mt Spokane Photography's idea of the new 200-400 lens.
How did you end up with so many cameras anyway?
I really think this is the million dollar (or at least US$ 6,000) question. Once you go past a certain point in length, lenses become super expensive. You can then use extenders as MWP mentioned but then questions re AF and IQ come up. Even a 1.3x crop helps with the reach, and the 1D 4 is about half the price, and you can use extenders on that. If the 1D X had a lot more megapixels you could combat the lack of reach by cropping more, but then you would probably lose out on fps. It is an interesting debate, but the quality of images from the 1D X do look outstanding, and as long as you have lenses that work best (is it groups A-F or something) then you should be on to a winner.
Keeping a 5d3 will be valuable for its silent shutter if you shoot golf, tennis anything where someone might brain you with a club or raquet if they get the sh!ts on also if you are mainly shooting with 2 1 series bodies then you just keep it in you bag with a wide lens on to grab the odd total scene shot
As long as you guys think 18mp is no big deal vs. 22mp, I'm comfortable with that decision.
I've got my 1DX but I'm going to hold out for a high megapixel camera like a 1DXs or something as a second body. Until then I will continue to use my 5D2 and 1D4!