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!
That's actually a superb idea. Thanks.No problem, it's easy to spend other people's money. I'll accept one of the 5dIII's as my commission
My current position is to sell a 5D3, the 1D4, and the 1Ds3, and buying a 1DX, giving me a pair of 1DX's and a 5D3. I could probably budget down the road either a newer 400mm lens or a 500mm lens. I'm not in a bind or anything, I was just looking for some opinions on what you might do if you were going to primarily shoot sports, but do some weddings here and there. Thanks!What about ending up with a two 1DX's and the 1D4? The 1DX's would more than cover you for pretty much everything (indoors, weddings, etc), and the 1DIV would allow your 400mm lens to cover the track portions you need the extra reach for. The re-sale value difference between the 5dIII and 1D4 is what, $1000? Compare that to maybe needing to buy the 500mm or 600mm and that's nothing.
Two 1DX's and a 5dIII just seems odd...I'm not sure you'd ever actually use the 5dIII, because the 1DX does everything it does, only better.
I am not in your league, being a amateur (with a few paid gigs a year). However, I think it is hard to weigh in given that I don't know your sports (wast difference if it is soccer, American footbal, or basket), so it is hard to know your range requirements. Is the sports you shoot fast sports? If so, I would opt for another 1DX, then you have two 1DX with a 70-200 F2.8 IS II on one, and a 500 on the other?
So you're using auto ISO -- that's what I wasn't clear on since that means everything wasn't set to manual. As I said earlier, it already been demonstrated that the 5D3 produces a brighter image with the exact same settings at the 1DX. If you set everything to manual (including ISO) with the exact same settings, the resulting image will be brighter on the 5D3 than the 1DX.
The real-world application of this is that with a fixed shutter and aperture, you can shoot a properly exposed image with a 1DX and the same properly exposed image on the 5D3 will have a lower ISO. So when it comes to comparing high ISO image quality, it's not a valid comparison to look at the same ISO side by side. In real-world shooting you would need to compare a 6400 1DX image with a 5000 5D3 image. This I believe is exactly what you showed in your testing. Given that balance, the 1DX may not have any edge in high ISO over the 1DX. I've heard someone propose Canon did this on purpose to give the 1DX an apparent edge in high ISO.
If everything is set to manual, then the camera isn't metering anything. The only time metering would come into play is when you're in an AV, TV, or auto ISO mode and the camera is deciding what settings to choose. If everything is on manual, then you are doing the metering not the camera. Am I missing something?
If you do want to test how the cameras each meter (and that is a valid question) you need to put them both in the same auto mode and shoot with identical focus points. When you do that you'll see the 5D3 and 1DX behave quite differently, specifically because of the focal point-weighted metering on the 1DX.