Canon 1DX vs 5DIII Wildlife Comparison

[neuroanatomist]

You're saying that you have to get the exposure right at capture, except when using an ISO that is above the native?  I don't understand how this could be, since the file that gets stored, has less information, if it is underexposed by 4 stops.  Sure that information is stored based on a boosted sensor's output (thus you are seeing a reduced dynamic range from the sensor, with all the other unwanted artifacts)...but the file itself has more bits, does it not?

Native ISO uses analog gain, before the signal is digitized. Expanded ISOs are digital gain, applied after ADC on top of the maximum analog gain. There's no difference between shooting at H2 and shooting at max native then pushing two stops in post.

[East Wind Photography]

And to be with on this, I don't notice any noise problems at ISO 5000 on the 5DIII either provided you are careful of the situation you use it in and post process efficiently. 

I guess I'm lost then.  I don't notice ANY noise problems with the 1DX and I routinely shoot ISO 5000.  Do you post process??

[CarlTN]

Neuro, thank you for the clarification.  I assume the digitally boosted gain, is what adds the (unnecessary) information to the file at capture, to make it larger than the otherwise under-exposed file, set to maximum native ISO.

[CarlTN]

East Wind, I can gaurantee I could produce a grain free, sharp 20x30 with either the 1DX or a 5D3, at ISO 1250, 1600, 2000, 2500, 3200, and possibly 4000.  And if the image is of an animal where the animal in the middle of the picture, is the only thing in focus...then I could go as high as ISO 10,000 on the 5D3, and 12,800 on the 1DX.  I could use only CS5 to do it, although ideally the higher ISO shots above 4000 would need NR better than PS (for those people that need to look at the print from 8 inches in front of it).

Neither camera's native resolution would be printable at 300 dpi, for a 20x30.  That resolution, is 54 megapixels.  I know because I recently scaled an image of mine, and produced a 20x30 print for one of my customers, shot with my puny little 15.1 MP 50D, at ISO 320....with a 200mm f/4 lens, at f/4.5.  (full frame equivalent 280mm).  It is hanging in their lobby, for all their customers to see.  It is sharp almost to the corners, and doesn't look like it was scaled up.  I used the standard bicubic, amongst other tweaks.

So again, you need not limit yourself to ISO 1000.  And again, the true test, would have been a comparison between the autofocus performance of the two bodies, in low light.  Hindsight now, of course.

[jrista]

Awesome!  On the ISO topic I didn't find the differences between the 1DX and 5DIII to be so significant to really make much difference.  I took a number of shots with both at sunset and some after the sun went down.  I ran the ISO up to 3200 and the noise on the 1DX was not much better than the 5DIII and in fact the noise patterns on the 1DX images were larger and more difficult to make them less obvious.

Just to make sure I understand, are you referring to things like banding noise when you use the term "noise patterns"? The 1D X does have higher read noise than the 5D III, and at lower ISO settings (100-800) I guess I wouldn't be surprised if it did have slightly more banding. At high ISO, I'd be surprised if you encountered anything but random photon noise with both cameras...however the higher pixel density of the 5D III would basically mean that, assuming identical subject framing, you have more pixels on subject, so noise is a smaller factor of detail overall. In other words...the lower resolution of the 1D X is the detractor in your comparison of the two cameras.

[eml58]

Just back from a Dive Trip, using the 1dx & 5DMK3 in Seacam Housings for the first time, 1Dx rules, High ISO leaves the 5DMK3 way behind, but the larger form factor in high current is a bitch.

Most of my Wildlife shooting other then Diving, is Antarctic, Arctic & Africa, love the small form factor of the 5DMK3, always use it combined with the 70-200f2.8 II, but when it comes to dust & weather sealing, again, the 1Dx is worth it's weight in Gold Coins, especially combined with the 400f/2.8 II & 600 f/4 II.

Cant get more than 12fps from the 1Dx, bummer, when you have a Cheater on the hunt going 70kph, 12fps isn't enough, but it'll do until something better comes along. Early morning Africa, late afternoon Africa, 1Dx rules again on the ability to operate at high ISO and retrieve stunning photos.

Both Cameras are tools, but tools for slightly different uses, and budgets, and both Cameras are amazing pieces of technology, Use whichever flips your hair back.

[R9knash]

I really wanted the 1DX for wildlife but like the OP, there were a few limitations that made it less attractive than the 5DIII.
1- The 18 MP vs the 22 MP does make a difference when cropping. Obviously if one can fill the frame with the desired correct composition, it is less of a problem but is usually not possible when reach with detail is a function of pixel density. A noisy detailed crop is better than one with big fat clean pixels that fail to provide enough detail. Noise reduction software cleans up noise better than not enough pixels that fail to provide the detail.
2- The 1DX shutter is way too noisy for a lot of wildlife.  Imagine to my chagrin when a rare opportunity was immediately spoiled when the bratta-bat-tat of the shutter caused the wolf to take one look at me, do an about face and trot off. I silently cursed while thinking how the 5DIII's shutter operation in silent stealth mode wouldn't have awoken a church-mouse at a wedding. Even single-shot is too noisy for some wildlife situations. Wild grizzlies hear quite well even when you are hiding from them. That click sound from the shutter is enough to make them aware of your presence. I hate that moment of fear when they look directly at you and you wonder what they will do next.

I do disagree with the OP regarding 6 fps being fast enough. No no no! Since most truly wild wildlife doesn't take direction well from the photographer, "work with me" I shouted in vain to the owl as it took off directly towards me. With 12 fps there are much better opportunities to capture the expressive moments when the bird transitions from gravity bound to taking flight, or the action of two lynx playing with each other, it makes sense to have the ability to capture more of those sequences than fewer. I'm not a machine that can capture decisive moments in single-shot of such opportunities.

I wishfully wish, that the much awaited 5DIII firmware update will include providing 8 fps to go along with AF at f/8.

[East Wind Photography]

(OP) Wow I really didn't expect to get so many responses regarding 12fps being more desirable than 6 or 8.  So after hearing everyone's arguments, I agree that in some situations 12fps would be better.  In some cases maybe 12fps would still not be enough.

However one thing that I still cannot live with is the LOUD shutter at 12fps for shooting wildlife.  Just in the two weeks that I was shooting with the 1DX I had several occasions where the noise scared off wildlife that I would have otherwise had more time to shoot at 6 or 8 fps.  In one case it had scared off mergansers which I had not even seen yet from the blind.

I can counter that with one experience with the 5DIII I had recently where I was able to photograph a couple of foxes from 25ft away in drive mode and the noise did not scare them off.

I can understand the need for as many frames as possible in some situations but I don't believe it's worth it if it's so loud as to affect what you are trying to photograph in the first place.  I still hold to my position that the 1DX is primarily geared up for sports photography.

Does the 1DX offer a lot of benefits?  Yes but it's still my opinion that the 5DIII is a worthy wildlife camera at half the price if you can live without 12fps drive mode.

[bdunbar79]

I agree the 5D Mark III is a worthy candidate.  Obviously it is, because people photographed wildlife long before the 1DX right?  Anyways, just for fun, I'm pretending I'm starting over and have no gear.  I've been contracted to shoot wildlife for my primary job, and I have to build up an equipment list.  My first camera of choice I suppose would be a 1D Mark IV.  I do this because of the 1.3x crop factor, the IQ, and the 10 fps.  If the shutter is too loud I'd keep a 7D as backup camera.  Later, when I can afford a 600 f/4L, I'd buy a FF 1DX, and shoot with all 3 cameras.

[bdunbar79]

The VALUE of the 1DX over the 5D3 has been beaten to death.  Whether you need the benefits of the 1DX over the 5D3, is totally up to you.  But objectively they are there, and at face value over a variety of shooting situations, the 1DX whips the 5D3 soundly.  I own both and it's really obvious to me.  However, I need the benefits, whereas you might not.

[RS2021]

I wishfully wish, that the much awaited 5DIII firmware update will include providing 8 fps to go along with AF at f/8.

Have you considered the late-night comedy circuit? 

[vmk]

+1

I wishfully wish, that the much awaited 5DIII firmware update will include providing 8 fps to go along with AF at f/8.

Have you considered the late-night comedy circuit? 

[Kernuak]

The silent shutter on the 5D MkIII is a real selling point for wildlife. Last October, I was photographing pine martens and they were affected more by the IS on my 300 f/2.8 than the shutter on the MkIII. On the flip side though, for certain situations, 6 fps isn't enough and while I haven't used the 1D X, the 8fps of the 7D was also very useful a couple of years ago for a woodpecker feeding young at a nest, as I couldn't predict exactly the moment of the food pass. That has in fact become my main reason for keeping hold of the 7D (the IQ over the 7D is just too great to worry too much about the loss of reach most of the time).

[ishdakuteb]

in term of shooting and image quality purposes, they might be the same to our normal eyes.  however, it is 2x the price because of these:

1. shutter lag
2. shutter life (more than 2x)
3. metering (i.e. iSA, spot link to AF, etc)
4. frame rate
5. sync speed
6. seals and beatup
7. build-in battery grip

that i have not yet talked about gigabit ethernet, newly design on sensor cleaning, battery life, multi-point MA, etc.

i am one of those 5d mark iii owers who are drooling for 1dx.  i can not get it even though i can afford it (do not want to make my wife and my daughters feel bad even though she will okae when i ask for it) 

[East Wind Photography]

Hmmm yes at 12 fps it better have 2x the shutter life indeed!  Not so sure I noticed from a practical sense any difference in shutter lag between the 5dIII and 1dx.  Might be noticeable with remotely actuated triggers but I doubt many have reflexes good enough to take advantage of any decreased lag.  I certainly didn't notice it and I've been shooting for 30 years.  The metering linked to spot AF point is nice but I didn't see it give me anything in actual usage.  I still had to over expose/underexpose based on highlight lighting or lack thereof and I don think it's of any use if you dont use evaluative metering. 

Weather sealing is important.  If you spend a lot of time outdoors in the rain then its a plus....but I can still use my plastic bag which costs .25.  Though with the 5DIII I really don't worry about rain much.

Regarding the battery grip.... the 1DX only accepts one battery in the grip and the life of the battery (at least the one I got from CPS) only gave me two days of shooting before I had to recharge at 50%.  I unfortunately didn't check the shutter count...though I was chimping a lot and that does have some impact on battery life.  The 5DIII takes two batteries in the grip and I can usually shoot for 2 weeks before needing to recharge around 50%. Not a deal breaker by any means though just means you need to carry that extra battery in your bag and take the 5lb charging station with you on extended trips.

I did not find the Ethernet port very practical for wildlife work...at least where one doesn't need remote triggering and what not.  I didn't do any of that in the 2 weeks I had it and actually have only done it twice in 30 years, once on a film type camera.  The other using Magic Lantern on a T2i.  Didn't float my boat so never tried it again.

I too was drooling for the 1DX and I'm glad I got to evaluate it from CPS.  Saved me 6K.  Now I can wait to see what the 7DII has to offer.

in term of shooting and image quality purposes, they might be the same to our normal eyes.  however, it is 2x the price because of these:

1. shutter lag
2. shutter life (more than 2x)
3. metering (i.e. iSA, spot link to AF, etc)
4. frame rate
5. sync speed
6. seals and beatup
7. build-in battery grip

that i have not yet talked about gigabit ethernet, newly design on sensor cleaning, battery life, multi-point MA, etc.

i am one of those 5d mark iii owers who are drooling for 1dx.  i can not get it even though i can afford it (do not want to make my wife and my daughters feel bad even though she will okae when i ask for it)