5D Mark III vs. 1D Mark IV

[smithy]

I have more sharp images from a 13 images burst with the 5d than I had ever with the 1d4. So the keeperrate is higher, and buffer smaller, same difference.

The 1d X will annihilate both of the above.

Thanks Viggo.  Why do you think you get more sharp images from the 5D?  Is its AF system really that much better than the 1D's?

[Viggo]

I have more sharp images from a 13 images burst with the 5d than I had ever with the 1d4. So the keeperrate is higher, and buffer smaller, same difference.

The 1d X will annihilate both of the above.

Thanks Viggo.  Why do you think you get more sharp images from the 5D?  Is its AF system really that much better than the 1D's?

Yes it is.

Before I couldn't use Ai on still sitting subjects as the servo would go very small steps back and forth aaall the time, but now, it locks properly and stays on, no matter if the subject is a rubberball been thrown in an elevator or a picture hanging on a wall. Hilariously much better than anything else I have tried.

[smithy]

Yes it is.

Before I couldn't use Ai on still sitting subjects as the servo would go very small steps back and forth aaall the time, but now, it locks properly and stays on, no matter if the subject is a rubberball been thrown in an elevator or a picture hanging on a wall. Hilariously much better than anything else I have tried.

My dilemma is that I can buy a mint 1D IV for $800 less than a 5D III.  If you were in this position, would you still pick the 5D?  I know it's an awfully loaded question, but I thought I'd stick it out there...

[Z]

A lot of people have said the 5D Mark III doesn't have a buffer deep enough for sports. While I don't have a 5D Mark III, I'd like to clear up some of these misconceptions.  I'll use The Digital Picture as a source of reliable info - link: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx

Let's assume we're shooting raw and using the max burst rate. Using a 1D Mark IV (max RAW burst = 28 shots, 10fps), the buffer will fill up in 28/10 = 2.8 seconds. Using a 5D Mark III (max RAW burst = 18 shots, 6 fps), the buffer will fill up in 18/6 = 3 seconds. For argument's sake the 1D X buffer will fill in around 3 seconds too. How quickly you can shoot after the buffer is full depends on how quickly the buffer empties, which is in part determined by your CF card.

So to say things like:

the biggest complaint I have with the 5DM3 is the buffer as compared to the 1DM4 when I have to bury the shutter to cover a long play.

doesn't make sense. The 1D Mark IV isn't going to be able to "cover a longer play". It will get more photos during that play and increase your odds of getting that perfect shot. Furthermore, Bryan Carnathan's testing (The Digital Picture) revealed that in real world testing, the 5D Mark III shot a burst of 27 RAW frames at 6fps and the 1D Mark IV shot 34 frames at 10fps before the buffer filled (both with UDMA-6 CF cards). That equates to a burst of 4.5 seconds with the 5D Mark III and only 3.4 seconds with the 1D Mark IV.

What I'm not arguing here is that the 5D Mark III is a better sports camera. The 1D series will always be better for capturing that perfect moment. But if you want to "bury the shutter" (sorry to pick on you, Pixel) and essentially create a 6fps movie, the 5D is probably for you. 

[bycostello]

5 series..  weddings
1 series sport and journalism

apples and oranges really

[smithy]

5 series..  weddings
1 series sport and journalism

apples and oranges really

What do you think it is about these cameras that makes them better for either weddings or journalism?  One of Canon's marketing strategies for the 1D IV was showing how good it was for wedding photography, so I'm just curious.

This is the marketing I was referring to:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/jeff_ascough_blog.do

[WarStreet]

Using a 90mb extreme pro Sandisk CF card, and shooting raw, with a minimum of 1/500 shutter, wide open, fully charged battery, and good exposure to reach the maximum continuous shooting speed of 6fps, I manage to get between 18 - 23 shots. This is about 3 to 3.8 seconds of shooting and it was achieved even with ISO 800 (which increases the file size). It takes about 4-5 seconds to clear the buffer when full (didn't time it with a watch, just mental estimate )

When I was reading about the 1DIV tests with the same card, looks it manage to get about 25 - 30 shots which translates to 2.5 to 3 seconds. From the specs, it seems that even the 1DX won' t manage to do better than that due to it's fast 12fps.

It was interesting to read the digital picture reviewer saying that he used to prefer shooting sports with the 1DsIII with it's slow 5fps instead the 1DIV,  so that he get more background blur due to the sensor size difference. This was one of the main reasons I wanted to switch to FF for sports. Now, the 5DIII can give a 6fps with the best AF and and great FF sensor. It is also interesting to hear that the new 5DIII AF has better odds to get the photos in focus compared to the 1DIV.

I want to add that I am noticing that when the 5DIII battery is below 40-50%, the continuous shooting speed sounds to be about 4fps. It made me think about the battery grip rumor saying that the camera could achieve 6.9 fps with it. Anyone noticed the same fps decline ?     

   

[altenae]

Using a 90mb extreme pro Sandisk CF card, and shooting raw, with a minimum of 1/500 shutter, wide open, fully charged battery, and good exposure to reach the maximum continuous shooting speed of 6fps, I manage to get between 18 - 23 shots. This is about 3 to 3.8 seconds of shooting and it was achieved even with ISO 800 (which increases the file size). It takes about 4-5 seconds to clear the buffer when full (didn't time it with a watch, just mental estimate )

When I was reading about the 1DIV tests with the same card, looks it manage to get about 25 - 30 shots which translates to 2.5 to 3 seconds. From the specs, it seems that even the 1DX won' t manage to do better than that due to it's fast 12fps.

It was interesting to read the digital picture reviewer saying that he used to prefer shooting sports with the 1DsIII with it's slow 5fps instead the 1DIV,  so that he get more background blur due to the sensor size difference. This was one of the main reasons I wanted to switch to FF for sports. Now, the 5DIII can give a 6fps with the best AF and and great FF sensor. It is also interesting to hear that the new 5DIII AF has better odds to get the photos in focus compared to the 1DIV.

I want to add that I am noticing that when the 5DIII battery is below 40-50%, the continuous shooting speed sounds to be about 4fps. It made me think about the battery grip rumor saying that the camera could achieve 6.9 fps with it. Anyone noticed the same fps decline ?     

 

Yep same here with the battery power below 40%.
You are also right about the 5D Mark III buffer, same numbers here.
The clearing of the 5D mark III buffer seems faster then the 1D Mark IV.

But it seems I can't get an OOF image with the 5D mark III.... 
Brilliant AF system....

The 1Dx must be even better....

[herbert]

Here is another difference not yet mentioned:

Lens drive speed: Because of its higher voltage battery, the 1D Mark IV can supply an initial burst of power to select L-series USM telephoto lenses (limited to EF super telephotos) that drives them twice as fast as normal for the first second of operation. The 5D Mark III can't do that because its battery is lower voltage, and also because the camera body is not designed to accept higher voltage even if it was available.

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2012/03/canon-5d-mark-iii-unboxing-first-report.html

This is only from specification. I do not know if the difference is noticeable in the real world. I own neither camera but I am currently doing a lot of reading about the potential upgrades for my 7D which from my perspective is limited when used for distant nature photography in low light.

[Z]

Here is another difference not yet mentioned:

Lens drive speed: Because of its higher voltage battery, the 1D Mark IV can supply an initial burst of power to select L-series USM telephoto lenses (limited to EF super telephotos) that drives them twice as fast as normal for the first second of operation. The 5D Mark III can't do that because its battery is lower voltage, and also because the camera body is not designed to accept higher voltage even if it was available.

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2012/03/canon-5d-mark-iii-unboxing-first-report.html

This is only from specification. I do not know if the difference is noticeable in the real world. I own neither camera but I am currently doing a lot of reading about the potential upgrades for my 7D which from my perspective is limited when used for distant nature photography in low light.

I've briefly tried looking for a list of the lenses that applies to, but haven't found a definitive answer. I don't own any super teles so it would seem like a non-issue for me. For the pro sports photographers it's a no-brainer.

[WarStreet]

Here is another difference not yet mentioned:

Lens drive speed: Because of its higher voltage battery, the 1D Mark IV can supply an initial burst of power to select L-series USM telephoto lenses (limited to EF super telephotos) that drives them twice as fast as normal for the first second of operation. The 5D Mark III can't do that because its battery is lower voltage, and also because the camera body is not designed to accept higher voltage even if it was available.

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2012/03/canon-5d-mark-iii-unboxing-first-report.html

This is only from specification. I do not know if the difference is noticeable in the real world. I own neither camera but I am currently doing a lot of reading about the potential upgrades for my 7D which from my perspective is limited when used for distant nature photography in low light.

The reviewer of the digital picture, used the 5DIII for sports with 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 lenses and says that the focus hit rate was impressive. This guy has good experience with the 1 series cameras so I am sure he knows what he is talking about.

[herbert]

The reviewer of the digital picture, used the 5DIII for sports with 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 lenses and says that the focus hit rate was impressive. This guy has good experience with the 1 series cameras so I am sure he knows what he is talking about.

I also remember him saying that the hit rate for the 300/400 f2.8 mark II was less than for the mark I when he reviewed the new 300 and 400 lenses. This was with the older 1-series bodies (1Ds3/1D4) since the 5D3 was not out at the time. He did speculate that the 1Dx might be the solution to this issue.

If he tested the 5D3 mainly with the new super telephoto lenses (and it makes sense to do so) then the new focus system on the 5D3, and 1Dx, could be better in this case due to the co-development of the lens and body to be a perfect match. The lenses do have chips inside for focus control.

So if you are planning on buying a new super telephoto too then the line between the 1D4 and 5D3 is more blurred.

[altenae]

Even Arthur Morris (Also wildlife photographer) says:
As regular readers know I feel that the new autofocus system in the 5D III is the best ever in any Canon camera body. I make a higher percentage of sharp flight images than ever before and I love the various AF Area Selections modes
My BIF in focus has improved with the NEW 5D Mark III AF.


And I also agree.

-----
www.wildlife-photos.net
www.planepix.nl

[Mt Spokane Photography]

My dilemma is that I can buy a mint 1D IV for $800 less than a 5D III.  If you were in this position, would you still pick the 5D?  I know it's an awfully loaded question, but I thought I'd stick it out there...

No dilema, jump on the 1D MK IV.  A mint one with low shutter count will push $4,000 normally, so you could resell it if you change your mind for a $1200 profit.

[briansquibb]

I think have discussed at length why there is a higher percentage of keepers with the 5DIII

IIRC:

- 6fps gives the shooter more time to do minor adjustments, whereas at 10fps the take rate doesn't let that happen.

- the total number of keepers was higher for the 1D4, except of course the percentage was lower

- you are more likely to miss the shot at 6fps than at 10fps

There is always going to be exceptions - but I feel in general the 1D4 will win hands down, I just dont get any missed shots with my shooting whose subjects are not exceptionaly fast moving(except the ones where I wander off subject). Yesterday I was shooting street dancing without issue.

There is little difference in IQ at high ISO

There is one thing that was missed - and to me very important -

- The ability to shoot manual mode with ec which is not possible with the 5DIII