Should i go for the 1DX or the 5D Mk III?

[Hillsilly]

As I look out the window and see the rain bucket down, I think of all those photographers out there now capturing photos of someone's wedding.   I hope they're using a camera that isn't going to breakdown or get wrecked if it inadvertently gets too wet.  If you livelihood depends on you being at a particular place at a particular time ready to take photos in a wide range of conditions and weight or cost isn’t an issue, get the meanest, toughest guy on the block.  1DX.

[kitaoka]

Someone mentioned that the choice between a new 5D or 1DX depends on how large a print one plans to make. I currently use a 1DMIV for commercial work, primarily live performance and studio work. I have found that my images CAN and have been used for large outdoor media, like billboard ads. The file attached shows one of 16 billboards located in the greater Seattle area. My blend of customer needs between low light/high movement theatrical work and studio sessions puts me in the position of opting for the 1DX where I've placed my deposit. I had thought about purchasing a 5D II for studio work, but find that the 1D series fits my needs better on an overall basis.

Each person must assess how their needs fit a particular camera. I just wanted let you know that although some of my colleges do utilize medium to large format for advertising, it is not always necessary for large commercial work.

[plam_1980]

If we discard the fact, that all the qualities of the two cameras are merely hypothesis, perhaps you should go for 1Dx, if you have the money. Afterwards, when 5D III comes out, you can test it and if it will be good for your work, you can sell the 1DX and buy 5D III plus lenses. Simple as that.

In addition, do not be so sure that 5D III will have high MP sensor, the latest rumors are it will also be 18MP (and another even more hypothetical camera will be 30+)...

[pravkp]

Each person must assess how their needs fit a particular camera. I just wanted let you know that although some of my colleges do utilize medium to large format for advertising, it is not always necessary for large commercial work.

+1

the attached picture is a brilliant example.

[McCarthysPhotoWorks]

I use the 5DMkII myself, and have been pondering about the same question to myself....  This is my 2c:

Someone in this thread earlier on said that movement is better captured in a lower resolution camera; an argument which basically holds no ground at all.  You have to take into consideration all the aspects of the sensor.  One cannot compare the full frame sensor to that of the 7D.  You will never get the same amount of detail that the 5D is able to capture, with a 7D.  This I know for fact.  A friend of mine, who had a 7D and recently bought the 5DMkII, shot a photo in exactly the same conditions as I had shot with my 5D moments before. We used the same lens, the same shutter speed, same aperture, lighting, etc.  When the photos were compared at 100% zoom, the difference in detail and dynamic range was visible straight away.

Nowadays, it's not about pixels.  It's not about having 30MP anymore. It's about how much detail you can get on that sensor of yours.  I have been through the features of the 1Dx, and I definitely like what I see.  You don't have to be a sports photographer to need the high frame rate;  as mentioned earlier on in the thread.  High fps is equally important during that dance, or during a speech.

ISO.  OK the 5DMkII is great at pictures up to say 2000 ISO, even 3200...but I would never sell a print to my client which was shot at 6400, unless if it was a monochrome image with intentional grain.  Being able to shoot natural light, handheld, in dark situations is a definite plus.

So my final word is this: The 5DMkIII will never match the specs of the 1Dx.  It will def not match the ISO, fps, or focus performance. It will still be a pro camera, but it will NOT be Canon's flagship camera.

I think I will stick to my trusted 5DMkII for now, and wait for the 1Dx to hit the shelves.  I will then buy the 5DMkIII in the future, when my 5DMkII has gone through its paces.

Oh, and by the way, one other very very important thing...irrelevant of which camera you go for, is the glass.  I only use fast, L series glass on mine.  I would never go for third party brands.  It makes THE difference.  If you ask me what decision I am most grateful I took in the last couple of years, I would not answer that it was the decision to buy the MkII... but my decision to buy the 70-200mm IS II USM. 

...and the nifty fifty, of course.

So, my recommendation for you is that before you go for the 1Dx or 5DMkIII....first you should line up some high spec glass.

[briansquibb]

So my final word is this: The 5DMkIII will never match the specs of the 1Dx.  It will def not match the ISO, fps, or focus performance. It will still be a pro camera, but it will NOT be Canon's flagship camera.

<snip>

So, my recommendation for you is that before you go for the 1Dx or 5DMkIII....first you should line up some high spec glass.

+1 for the get good glass - that applies probably to all the pro cameras

I like the 70-200 II on a ff - here is a picture taken with it on a 1Ds3

[seanmcr6]

The 5DmkII showed Canon (and Nikon) that pro users would opt for a smaller form factor if the right sensor was in it. Proof is in the pudding, no one bought the 1Ds (except for early adopters...you know, before the 5DmkII was released)

The biggest advantage to the 1D bodies (and nikon d3/4) is the weatherproofing and battery size. The fact that Canon/Nikon saved their high end features for those bodies has nothing to do with the form factor. The people who really want the PRO bodies...want a SPEED camera, not a High MP camera. Hence the moves Canon/Nikon have made with their Pro bodies.

If Nikon D800 is any indication, you'll see Canon release a 5DmkIII with a super high MP sensor. It's the logical competitor and meets the needs of many pros. Studio shooters are more content with the XXD frame than I think sports shooter would ever be.

I'm the exception I guess.

When I went digital, it was to a 20D (with grip)...than 30D...than 1DmkIII. That camera changed the way I shoot and how profitable I was. Then I bought a 5DmkII, primarily for studio work and sold it 2 weeks later. I loved the sensor, but I couldn't stand not having my 1D body anymore. The 5D is just so....slow. Using all the same glass, the focusing a speed and accuracy definitely went down. I transitioned from sports to commercial work and then was chopping for Canon to release the 1DsmkIV...which never came. I was asked to do video work...so voila, back to the 5dMkII. Now I find I use that camera 80% of the time, just for the resolution. When ever I need the speed or I'm running 2 camera, I am so amazed at how awesome the 1d is. Unfortunately, I can't justify the 1Dx, mostly for the downgrade in resolution. I would love the upgrade in performance, but even with my pro discount, it's not worth the $$$.

I guess the 1Ds is the last Pro bodied studio camera we'll see from Canon.

[briansquibb]

I guess the 1Ds is the last Pro bodied studio camera we'll see from Canon.

... and if you dont need high iso the 1Ds3 beats the 5DII as a general purpose camera as well with its super pro AF system as well as all the other 1 series benefits