5d3 Vs 5d4

[tomscott]

I think the thing is with these cameras is for many they are pro bodies. With pro purpose and are economical decisions and not lusted after rather needed.

I used mine for 4 years professionally with numerous other bodies as back ups. Before it was stolen and the thing needed a new shutter, most of the rubber grip was warn away the mode dial was a little dodgy. Basically it has been used within an inch of its life and wasnt really worth a great deal. That 4-5 year period between a new body is more than enough time to go through 2-3 shutters so for many its more they need a new camera rather than these features are going to make the absolute difference. The cameras more than make their money back in spades and it makes sense from an economical point of view. A brand new camera with a 2 year warranty or the older cameras with less reliability cost of downtime to repair etc.

Its obvious technology speed is slowing with DSLRs and they are incredible cameras the III will create amazing pictures in pretty much any situation. The newer ones are perfecting small issues, evolving rather than recreating. The new features of the IV will make the everyday use of the cameras better and the obvious speed gains in operation, added features increased resolution and IQ will have added value.

At £3500 over 4 years basically costs £20 a week. Two bodies makes sense.

I just like to wait 6 months or so for a little more cost saving and ensure the cameras dont have any issues so early adoption down time wont be a problem.

 

[Pookie]

The other body i picked up for this trip is the 6D... A so called low light body. What a joke that is, I'll take the 5D3 any day of the week over that body. It struggles when the D3 or D4 just chugs along.

Hi, Pookie.

Could you elaborate a little more about your struggles with the 6D? I have a choice to make soon between the 6D II, (when it comes out), vs the 5D III. My budget is give or take about $2.000 USD. I see that the Canon store has refurbished 5D III's in stock for $2,000. I must wait and see the specs of the 6D II before I make my decision.

With my current 6D, I use the 70-200 F/2.8 L USM and the 24-70 F/2.8 L II and have never had any problems focusing with the center point in almost complete darkness. I know that many people have called the 6d, "the low light king," but in reality I think that they are talking about the AF center point in low light.

It will be a hard decision.

Brian

The 6D is ok at the center but that is about it. The 5D3 and 5D4 is useful throughout the focus points and when shooting in low light that is truly king... especially in events and on the fly.

The 6D is for my wife to replace her very old and beat up 7D... I had a day with it and the 5D3. The 5D3 had the 24-70 II and the 6D had a 50 1.4... The 6D struggled endlessly. The 5D3 just worked, every time throughout the entire frame.

 

[Pookie]

I bought a 5D4 and a 35mm II for our month in Maui. I've been shooting UW free diving and scuba with both the 5D3 and 5D4 with over 3000 shots on both rigs. I can honestly say there is little difference between the two bodies in some of the most demanding low light situations I can think of. The 5D4 is a slight improvement but nothing to rave about or make the 5D3 obsolete. I'll have plenty of examples up in about a week once back to the mainland.

The other body i picked up for this trip is the 6D... A so called low light body. What a joke that is, I'll take the 5D3 any day of the week over that body. It struggles when the D3 or D4 just chugs along.

Interesting. All the raw files I have looked at 5d3vs4 the 4 doesnt show the banding and colour noise issues that the 3 does which shows its head in many situations. The usable DR of the 4 seems much better than the 3 too.

Whether that is worth the £1000 extra is down to what you shoot I suppose. I shoot weddings and in the dark environments I think a worthy improvement from what ive seen.

I made my mind up and going for the 4 after 4 years with the 3 just waiting for some deals.

There is a difference but again, nothing that blows the doors off the 5D3. I personally never had a banding issue but I don't yank shadows from the deepest depths... ever. Shadows are shadows for a reason and if I don't like the look I shoot with strobes (even in wedding venues). Something about over processing the crap out of images to "rescue" shadows just looks very amateurish and only leads to major problems down the road. I actually believe it's the hobbyist that "need" to rescue shadows more than any other group of photographers I know of. Probably explains why it's so popular here on this forum.

I just spent the entire month of May shooting underwater and free diving in very low light situs and there really is only a slight difference in the two bodies. I own 7 5D3's for my business and now a 5D4 for personal use. I shoot weddings and commercial portraiture for a living. I run a studio and employ 6 other shooters to cover over a 100+ weddings a year. Would I switch all of them out for 5D4s... absolutely not. Not a huge reason to do it in my mind. I'll stick with the 5D3's until they die and need replacing or a new 5D comes along. Besides, these days when I shoot weddings it's for my high end clients and the 645Z is what I work with or even MF film.

I'll be putting up processed examples from the 5D4 and 5D3 on my personal site and Flickr when back on Monday.

 

[pwp]

I think the thing is with these cameras is for many they are pro bodies. With pro purpose and are economical decisions and not lusted after rather needed.

I used mine for 4 years professionally with numerous other bodies as back ups. Before it was stolen and the thing needed a new shutter, most of the rubber grip was warn away the mode dial was a little dodgy. Basically it has been used within an inch of its life and wasnt really worth a great deal. That 4-5 year period between a new body is more than enough time to go through 2-3 shutters so for many its more they need a new camera rather than these features are going to make the absolute difference. The cameras more than make their money back in spades and it makes sense from an economical point of view. A brand new camera with a 2 year warranty or the older cameras with less reliability cost of downtime to repair etc.

Its obvious technology speed is slowing with DSLRs and they are incredible cameras the III will create amazing pictures in pretty much any situation. The newer ones are perfecting small issues, evolving rather than recreating. The new features of the IV will make the everyday use of the cameras better and the obvious speed gains in operation, added features increased resolution and IQ will have added value.

At £3500 over 4 years basically costs £20 a week. Two bodies makes sense.

I just like to wait 6 months or so for a little more cost saving and ensure the cameras dont have any issues so early adoption down time wont be a problem.

I had a similar experience with the 5D MkIII. It was worn out and on it's fourth shutter when I upgraded to the immediately superior 5D MkIV (for the reasons already solidly discussed in this thread). The changes are not revolutionary, rather a good solid upgrade.

However, in hindsight, back when I bought the 5D MkIII I likely would have been better off digging a little deeper and getting a 1DX which I did end up getting much later on. While there are no buyers regrets with the 5D MkIV, similarly I may have been better off long term getting a 1DX MkII. 1-Series bodies just last the distance if you're a busy high volume shooter. My current 1DX is on 540k shutter count and going strong. A now sold 1D MkIV was close to 900k when it was retired (and given to an assistant) and still going strong. Same with a very high mileage 1D MkIIn and a 1Ds back in pre-history.

One feature I value very highly with 5D III/IV is the silent shutter function. Nothing prepared me for how valuable this has become. The ability/option to keep shooting in sensitive situations simply means a better outcome for clients with more deliverable files.

-pw

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I think the thing is with these cameras is for many they are pro bodies. With pro purpose and are economical decisions and not lusted after rather needed.

I used mine for 4 years professionally with numerous other bodies as back ups. Before it was stolen and the thing needed a new shutter, most of the rubber grip was warn away the mode dial was a little dodgy. Basically it has been used within an inch of its life and wasnt really worth a great deal. That 4-5 year period between a new body is more than enough time to go through 2-3 shutters so for many its more they need a new camera rather than these features are going to make the absolute difference. The cameras more than make their money back in spades and it makes sense from an economical point of view. A brand new camera with a 2 year warranty or the older cameras with less reliability cost of downtime to repair etc.

Its obvious technology speed is slowing with DSLRs and they are incredible cameras the III will create amazing pictures in pretty much any situation. The newer ones are perfecting small issues, evolving rather than recreating. The new features of the IV will make the everyday use of the cameras better and the obvious speed gains in operation, added features increased resolution and IQ will have added value.

At £3500 over 4 years basically costs £20 a week. Two bodies makes sense.

I just like to wait 6 months or so for a little more cost saving and ensure the cameras dont have any issues so early adoption down time wont be a problem.

I had a similar experience with the 5D MkIII. It was worn out and on it's fourth shutter when I upgraded to the immediately superior 5D MkIV (for the reasons already solidly discussed in this thread). The changes are not revolutionary, rather a good solid upgrade.

However, in hindsight, back when I bought the 5D MkIII I likely would have been better off digging a little deeper and getting a 1DX which I did end up getting much later on. While there are no buyers regrets with the 5D MkIV, similarly I may have been better off long term getting a 1DX MkII. 1-Series bodies just last the distance if you're a busy high volume shooter. My current 1DX is on 540k shutter count and going strong. A now sold 1D MkIV was close to 900k when it was retired (and given to an assistant) and still going strong. Same with a very high mileage 1D MkIIn and a 1Ds back in pre-history.

One feature I value very highly with 5D III/IV is the silent shutter function. Nothing prepared me for how valuable this has become. The ability/option to keep shooting in sensitive situations simply means a better outcome for clients with more deliverable files.

-pw

I find it fascinating how different photographers have such different requirements from their gear. As a wedding photographer, I spread the usage load across three camera bodies. One camera at the beginning of the season is marked for rough work, working close to the ground, near water...etc. So that cam gets the most physical damage. Each of my cams has a 4 year business life and then I replace it at then end of the year. I never upgrade in the middle of a season, I would choose the same model if I had too. For my line of work a 5D3/4 is a perfect union between size, weight, features, IQ, focus and build quality. All of my cams were bought a year apart, so I they get replaced on that same schedule. So I get one year where I don't need to swap out a camera. So when a 5D5 comes out...I have no gear or spec lust, it will eventually come to me based on my cam upgrade cycle.

So I always bare in mind that on a public forum that includes pro, semis and amateurs each with different expectations and gear needs...I am always careful to point out that my needs are very specific and my advise can only really help someone who does the same as me.

 

[hne]

With the price of a new 5DmkIII at 27000 SEK and 5DmkIV at 30000 SEK, I see no reason anyone would buy a new mkIII other than replacing a broken one in situations where identical handling is crucial.

The original question included the option of a used mkIII and those are roughly half the price (15000SEK) of a new mkIV around here. This becomes a question of how you value the additional features of the mkIV. Having just ordered a mkIV, I can share my thoughts:

• DPAF is something that's had me carry an extra body for video. Selling that plus the normal zoom for its crop saves me 2/3 of the price difference, roughly 10000
• iTR AF with face detection (also available in the 5DS) makes selecting AF point unnecessary for half-body or wider portraits, a use case covering roughly half of my images. I'm lazy and would happily pay 2000 to get that automated.
• Possibility to configure custom function to have a button quickly switch between that and the single point spot focus I used for half the rest of the photos: 1000
• 2 years factory guarantee is easily worth 2000 at these levels of investment

In the end, the value for money for me is this very close to equal between the two. One happens to cost twice as much.

Have I saved up for it? Yes.
How long will it last me? Probably 4 years.
What resale value might it have after that time period? Half, give or take.
What's the cost? About $1/day

Not too hard if a decision, except for that unknown value proposition of the 6DmkII...

 

[justbeingmiko]

I have just made the upgrade from the 3 to the 4. On paper it simply wasn't an worthwhile upgrade. Minimal, incremental, call it what you like, the case was not there.

But the I hired one as a second body when I went storm chasing. Big mistake...huge!!

On paper no case....but in physical form...well no competition. I bought one as soon as I returnrd from my trip.

Why?

The incremental takes an excellent camera (5d3) and turns it into an amazing camera (5d4). The focus is better, faster, more accurate. The exposure metering provides far more consistent results in all types of lighting. But the crowning glory...image quality. The raw files are so clean, so well rendered in colour and tone that they are a pleasure to work with.

The 5d3 files were good but sometimes needed some extra care and attention, to squeeze that desired quality out of them. The 5d4....no effort. Almost perfect.

All of this is opinion, of course. But if anyone is sitting on the fence I cannot recommend trying the 5d4 to see for yourself.

Canon nailed this one, for sure!!

 

[hne]

The incremental takes an excellent camera (5d3) and turns it into an amazing camera (5d4). The focus is better, faster, more accurate. The exposure metering provides far more consistent results in all types of lighting. But the crowning glory...image quality. The raw files are so clean, so well rendered in colour and tone that they are a pleasure to work with.

The 5d3 files were good but sometimes needed some extra care and attention, to squeeze that desired quality out of them. The 5d4....no effort. Almost perfect.

I haven't used the 5DmkIII but I can really do nothing but agree to the above: with my previous four bodies (70D, 5DmkII, 550D, 350D), I've been constantly worried about getting exposure dead-on, used nothing but sunny WB preset on camera outdoors and tungsten preset indoors, flipped AF points like no tomorrow, used my own camera colour profiles for consistent colour and even resorted to hand-held light meter for ambient when in doubt. And still had to tweak colours in post. 5DmkIV on Faithful picture style, auto whitebalance, auto ISO and auto AF point selection with face priority and I get more consistent output just taking the SOOC JPEGs.

So good and consistent it's almost ruining the fun.