- Status
DMITPHOTO said:
If you have a 5D Mark III and are satisfied with the IQ, AND all you want to add are higher fps, then no in your case I'd say it's not worth it. Are you going to be a paid sports photographer? If not, get the 1D Mark IV. If you are, then I'd go with the 1DX over the 1D4 personally. It's a lot of money either way. I guess you could sell your 5D3 and buy a 1DX too.
Upvote
0
I shoot sports and have the 1dm3 with 10fps, I also have the 5dm3. I tell you what, i can do everything i have done with 6fps, sure it may not be able to gun as quick but honestly if you already spent the dough why spend another $4G just for the FPS unless it is work case related? Just work with it, see what you give up as opposed to what you need. Else if you got money to burn buy the 1dx. LOL
Upvote
0
D
DMITPHOTO
Guest
I thought about the 1d3 so it's not 4grand for the 1d4 but the money via local sports (high school, semi pro) stuff isn't very good. There's a lot of motorcross races near by where I live which can be a cash cow lol, so basically I just wanted something that cold keep up with the high demand put on it. I've used the 5d3 for some birds and stuff but with sports sometimes thAt one extra frame would've been the shot lol
Upvote
0
The main issue should be autofocus speed and frames per second. If you shoot bursts with 6 FPS and you miss a critical moment and end up only with pictures slightly before or after that moment you may want to purchase a 1D. In the digital picture review of the 1D-X there is a list of camera response times, which I have found enlightening in this respect.
Upvote
0
squarebox said:
Yes, but the issue here is that he already spent $3500 on a 5D Mark III. The 1D X for him, I'm guessing, on top of that isn't worth it. The 1D Mark IV is a really good camera, for much less money than a 1DX. Having a 1D Mark IV/5D Mark III combo is pretty stellar.
Upvote
0
D
DMITPHOTO
Guest
The auto focus of the 5d3 is incredible which is why I liked the dx because it's the same system. And I'll have to read it
Ya lol it comes down to the money. Because I was looking to upgrade to the new 500mm version 2. However, wanted the fps and Preformance. And hearing such good things about the dx, Im looking for something that will last and hold up and I think it's rated for 400,000 shutter clicks right? But I've used the mark 4 which is a good camera but just didn't know if it's better to do the dx and wait on the 500
I usually have 24-70 on one and 70-200 on another or difference combos.
Ya lol it comes down to the money. Because I was looking to upgrade to the new 500mm version 2. However, wanted the fps and Preformance. And hearing such good things about the dx, Im looking for something that will last and hold up and I think it's rated for 400,000 shutter clicks right? But I've used the mark 4 which is a good camera but just didn't know if it's better to do the dx and wait on the 500
I usually have 24-70 on one and 70-200 on another or difference combos.
Upvote
0
Two camera set up sounds good. I'd suggest sell the 5dIII and invest in 1Dx - once you've made a bit of money from it then get the 500 too.
Upvote
0
M
M.ST
Guest
The 1D X it´s worth the price you pay for it.
If you compare it too the 5D Mark III the 1D X have:
+ better AF
+ better image quality
+ faster
+ more solid
+ 400.000 possible shutter releases to 150.000 (5D Mark III)
- bigger
Compared to the 1D IV:
+ better AF
+ better image quality
+ faster
- no crop (you need a TC or a longer lens for the same shot)
If you have only the money for one body buy the 1D X. If you have the 5D Mark III or want buy it, buy the 1D X instead.
If you have the 1D IV and you need the crop-factor. Hold the camera as long as possible.
If you compare it too the 5D Mark III the 1D X have:
+ better AF
+ better image quality
+ faster
+ more solid
+ 400.000 possible shutter releases to 150.000 (5D Mark III)
- bigger
Compared to the 1D IV:
+ better AF
+ better image quality
+ faster
- no crop (you need a TC or a longer lens for the same shot)
If you have only the money for one body buy the 1D X. If you have the 5D Mark III or want buy it, buy the 1D X instead.
If you have the 1D IV and you need the crop-factor. Hold the camera as long as possible.
Upvote
0
C
Cannon Man
Guest
M.ST said:
My opinion is that the "big" size of the 1DX is an advantage, not a negative. 5D has nothing to grip on to.. i have big enough hands that the only way to hold the 5D is with my first 2 fingers and my thumb and then the camera's sharp edge rests on my palm which is annoying.
In 1D camera's my whole palm and all fingers are comfortably on the camera vertically and horizontally.
Your second negative was the missing 1.3x reach.. i believe that you would end up with better image quality and better noise when the 1DX is cropped to 1.3x.
And to me full frame is much more useful than a cropped sensor. if you have money for longer lenses full frame is the way to go! more light in, less dense pixels and better bokeh.
To me the 1DX is simply the best camera available!
Upvote
0
I've got both a 1D IV and a 1DX. 70% of the photos I do are wildlife and rock bands. I was really really happy with the performance of the 1D 1V.
The performance of the 1DX is stunning! Let me try and give you some real world comparisons. For birds in flight the IV would track the eye of the bird accurately 5 times out of 10, with the X it's 9 out of 10. When doing low light band shots, the 1D IV needed noise filtering over ISO 1600 , with the 1D X it's 16000 ! The extra shutter speed of the 1DX is welcome, but not actually noticeable in the real world
Loosing the 1.3 crop factor of the ID 1V is a pain for wildlife photography, of course you can crop afterwards, but, I'm constantly reaching for longer lenses that I don't have
The rear screen is supposed to be much better on the X, I haven't noticed a difference
The menu structure, and general firmware capability on the X is much better(More like the 7D, which I've also got)
The X is heavier, but if your are used to the weight of the IV, it's not much different
I don't like the design of having 2 CF cards, rather than 1 SD , 1CF. You can buy SD cards anywhere, and I like the idea of always being able to get a card, if the one I've got becomes lost/corrupted.
Net, net - for low light shots, the X is unbeatable. For fast action shots, the X tracking is outstanding. Everything else is good, but probably not worth the huge amount you have to pay
The performance of the 1DX is stunning! Let me try and give you some real world comparisons. For birds in flight the IV would track the eye of the bird accurately 5 times out of 10, with the X it's 9 out of 10. When doing low light band shots, the 1D IV needed noise filtering over ISO 1600 , with the 1D X it's 16000 ! The extra shutter speed of the 1DX is welcome, but not actually noticeable in the real world
Loosing the 1.3 crop factor of the ID 1V is a pain for wildlife photography, of course you can crop afterwards, but, I'm constantly reaching for longer lenses that I don't have
The rear screen is supposed to be much better on the X, I haven't noticed a difference
The menu structure, and general firmware capability on the X is much better(More like the 7D, which I've also got)
The X is heavier, but if your are used to the weight of the IV, it's not much different
I don't like the design of having 2 CF cards, rather than 1 SD , 1CF. You can buy SD cards anywhere, and I like the idea of always being able to get a card, if the one I've got becomes lost/corrupted.
Net, net - for low light shots, the X is unbeatable. For fast action shots, the X tracking is outstanding. Everything else is good, but probably not worth the huge amount you have to pay
Upvote
0
The difference between the 1d X and 5d 3 is much bigger than people realize from reading about them. The AF and the 12 fps gets you so many fantsatic images you couldn't have gotten without it. The exposure is so dead on it's ridicolous!! I hardly adjust anything in Lr.
The tracking is awesomely superior. To me it's at least a stop better noise-wise, and the image can be pushed more without adding the crazy noise. The lower iso's are the cleanest I have seen, and also better than the 5d3.
Swap it vertically and have the exact same layout of buttons and the same grip is not to be underestimated.
And all of the small but very important custom functions like limiting your shutterspeed range in Av mode etc makes it way worth it to me.
The 5d3 isn't the same with AF and tracking, it isn't the same IQ wise as the 1d X has much less noise and have WAY sharper files.
The tracking is awesomely superior. To me it's at least a stop better noise-wise, and the image can be pushed more without adding the crazy noise. The lower iso's are the cleanest I have seen, and also better than the 5d3.
Swap it vertically and have the exact same layout of buttons and the same grip is not to be underestimated.
And all of the small but very important custom functions like limiting your shutterspeed range in Av mode etc makes it way worth it to me.
The 5d3 isn't the same with AF and tracking, it isn't the same IQ wise as the 1d X has much less noise and have WAY sharper files.
Upvote
0
This is a tough one to answer for someone else, but for me the 1DX was a big advantage. I currently use a 1D4 and a 1DX and my keeper rate has more than doubled from the 1D4 when using the 1DX. Yep, easily more than doubled. The 12 fps makes a big difference when shooting fast action sports like this. 
http://youtu.be/jNa5h5eE7gQ?hd=1
http://youtu.be/jNa5h5eE7gQ?hd=1
Upvote
0
Viggo said:
It is quite obvious. Things have to be like that. Otherwise you'd be wrong to spend such an awful lot of money on a PJ workhorse. I am glad for every pro who is equipped with excellent gear via the 1DX. As an amateur who hardly commercialzes his photography but who appreciates some better high ISO and IQ, I will go 5D3 within the next months from my current 30D which I am shooting since five years. It always delivered decent results even at ISO 3200 b/w, exposed to the right. So Robert Frank high ISO shots, here I come ;-) I don't worry about decent noise nor blown highlights by pushing it to the limit since I've seen his photography. Sometimes even slight motion blur adds to a b/w photograph.
@Viggo: Did you take any pictures at "insane ISOs" as high as 102 and/or 204 k...? Would be intresting if you had some shots to share. Keep the good work up! Cheers, Peter
Upvote
0
pedro said:
Just for the record, I am too just a hobbyist, and I don't think I have earned even a thousand dollars in 12 years of digital photo, lol.
I can take a few for you later tonight, but I have to say, I don't see the need for me to go beyond 25600, both because it's noisy and because with fast lenses, it almost doesn't exist a situation where I need to. Maybe for depth in video...
Upvote
0
DMITPHOTO said:
If s-p-e-e-d is important to you, 1D X will take care of that, plus better AF.
Friend of mine has 1D X. We went to Pomono racetrack in CA to compare the two cameras. fps + AF on 1D X made my 5D III looks like a kid toy. 1st couple times I shot with 1D X, I was able to get 6-8 good pics out of 12.
But when speed is no longer a factor, both 5D III and 1D X are quite neck-to-neck in term of IQ. Holding 1D X body is a big different from 5D III. I have smaller hand, I'm not sure this is the camera for me.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
