Canon 1DX vs 5DIII Wildlife Comparison

[East Wind Photography]

Here are the two crops. The ISO 6400 one could have been exposed more to the right but things were happening fast and well..... The 1600 one the head was already bleeding past the edge but it worked. Only a small highlight was blown out.

Overall I'm very happy with the result...though the 6400 one could have been better.

Another example taken at ISO 6400. I should add that these are not from RAW but processed in Photoshop using normal workflows.

Wow, looks awesome for being ISO 6400. I think I'm sold on the 5D III. I'll have to pick one of them up this year, assuming I can scrounge up the money.

 

[East Wind Photography]

The 6400 shot was 1/2000 f/8 +3 over the meter in full overcast
The 1600 shot was 1/1000 f/9 +1 over meter in direct sun

 

[East Wind Photography]

(OP) Here is another one but at ISO1000. 1/2500 F8 +1 over meter in full evening sun.

Going to be windy this weekend. I'd like to push the ISO up beyond 6400 and see how it handles things. However it's easy to overexpose the head on bald eagles. Actually some overcast is better in that sense as you get better exposure.

 

[East Wind Photography]

By the time you are ready you might have a 7DII available and then you are back to the drawing board on the decision making process.

If you have choose between these cameras you are very lucky as either one will do fine.

Well said, and there are an awful lot of lucky people on here, it seems to me!

Not luck here been busting my bottom for 8 months (still got 3 to go) working 6 day weeks to get this camera.... Which is why it's so important to get it right

 

[Skulker]

If you have choose between these cameras you are very lucky as either one will do fine.

Well said, and there are an awful lot of lucky people on here, it seems to me!

Not luck here been busting my bottom for 8 months (still got 3 to go) working 6 day weeks to get this camera.... Which is why it's so important to get it right

If you have to work 6 days a week for 11 months "to get this camera" my suggestion would be go for the 5D3. I suspect the extra cost of the 1Dx will not be worth the effort for you. Although I'm not sure if you mean the 1Dx or the 5D3 when you say "this camera". Either way I suggest go with the cheaper option and spend the free time taking photos.

 

[AWSPhotography]

If you have choose between these cameras you are very lucky as either one will do fine.

Well said, and there are an awful lot of lucky people on here, it seems to me!

Not luck here been busting my bottom for 8 months (still got 3 to go) working 6 day weeks to get this camera.... Which is why it's so important to get it right

If you have to work 6 days a week for 11 months "to get this camera" my suggestion would be go for the 5D3. I suspect the extra cost of the 1Dx will not be worth the effort for you. Although I'm not sure if you mean the 1Dx or the 5D3 when you say "this camera". Either way I suggest go with the cheaper option and spend the free time taking photos.

argg but im sooo close now but to be fair the places im looking at going (which means at some point i will go) i think i would't be as confident with the 5d3's weather sealing.
@eastwind (about the 7dII) lol now now stop throwing ideas into my head, i already have my 600mm (which also took ages to work for) so the crop factor on the 7dII is VERY appealing... but to be honest i'm thinking of the 1dx and see how the 7dII pans out in reviews and what you lot here think of it before i consider it as a 2nd body., and btw wonderful baldy shots.

and can anyone here explain why canon in uk is sooooo bloody expensive compared to the rest of the world?

 

[Stu_bert]

AWSPhotography - well if you don't mind a grey-import then UK is not more expensive....

I figure the chances of Pro Canon equipment going wrong within warranty is pretty unlikely, plus all their equipment is made in a handful of locations in Asia. If you want full warranty, fair enough. I've bought three 2nd hand 1D series bodies without issues, so I figure grey import is less risk.

I've used procamera in the uk (no affiliation), and their price compares well to Adorama / B&H / Amazon.

Like you I am considering a 1Dx or MK III, but really want to wait and see if the new bodies have (even) better noise handling (I do nature, travel & landscapes), so need a mix of capabilities....

 

[bdunbar79]

AWSPhotography - well if you don't mind a grey-import then UK is not more expensive....

I figure the chances of Pro Canon equipment going wrong within warranty is pretty unlikely, plus all their equipment is made in a handful of locations in Asia. If you want full warranty, fair enough. I've bought three 2nd hand 1D series bodies without issues, so I figure grey import is less risk.

I've used procamera in the uk (no affiliation), and their price compares well to Adorama / B&H / Amazon.

Like you I am considering a 1Dx or MK III, but really want to wait and see if the new bodies have (even) better noise handling (I do nature, travel & landscapes), so need a mix of capabilities....

Unless the new body replaces the 1DX, it's not going to have better noise handling. No chance, zero. And of course if it did replace the 1DX, the price.

 

[jrista]

AWSPhotography - well if you don't mind a grey-import then UK is not more expensive....

I figure the chances of Pro Canon equipment going wrong within warranty is pretty unlikely, plus all their equipment is made in a handful of locations in Asia. If you want full warranty, fair enough. I've bought three 2nd hand 1D series bodies without issues, so I figure grey import is less risk.

I've used procamera in the uk (no affiliation), and their price compares well to Adorama / B&H / Amazon.

Like you I am considering a 1Dx or MK III, but really want to wait and see if the new bodies have (even) better noise handling (I do nature, travel & landscapes), so need a mix of capabilities....

Unless the new body replaces the 1DX, it's not going to have better noise handling. No chance, zero. And of course if it did replace the 1DX, the price.

They certainly could have better noise handling at a low frame rate. FF High ISO IQ is certainly one of the attractions of the 1D X, but frame rate, AF system, and metering system are really more important ones, IMO. I could easily see a megapixel monster getting better IQ, both at high and low ISO along with a DR boost, at a much lower frame rate with a more basic AF system (although not as basic as the 6D).

 

[bdunbar79]

AWSPhotography - well if you don't mind a grey-import then UK is not more expensive....

I figure the chances of Pro Canon equipment going wrong within warranty is pretty unlikely, plus all their equipment is made in a handful of locations in Asia. If you want full warranty, fair enough. I've bought three 2nd hand 1D series bodies without issues, so I figure grey import is less risk.

I've used procamera in the uk (no affiliation), and their price compares well to Adorama / B&H / Amazon.

Like you I am considering a 1Dx or MK III, but really want to wait and see if the new bodies have (even) better noise handling (I do nature, travel & landscapes), so need a mix of capabilities....

Unless the new body replaces the 1DX, it's not going to have better noise handling. No chance, zero. And of course if it did replace the 1DX, the price.

They certainly could have better noise handling at a low frame rate. FF High ISO IQ is certainly one of the attractions of the 1D X, but frame rate, AF system, and metering system are really more important ones, IMO. I could easily see a megapixel monster getting better IQ, both at high and low ISO along with a DR boost, at a much lower frame rate with a more basic AF system (although not as basic as the 6D).

Right. But not a 7D Mark II. It would be a very high-end FF camera to do that.

 

[jrista]

AWSPhotography - well if you don't mind a grey-import then UK is not more expensive....

I figure the chances of Pro Canon equipment going wrong within warranty is pretty unlikely, plus all their equipment is made in a handful of locations in Asia. If you want full warranty, fair enough. I've bought three 2nd hand 1D series bodies without issues, so I figure grey import is less risk.

I've used procamera in the uk (no affiliation), and their price compares well to Adorama / B&H / Amazon.

Like you I am considering a 1Dx or MK III, but really want to wait and see if the new bodies have (even) better noise handling (I do nature, travel & landscapes), so need a mix of capabilities....

Unless the new body replaces the 1DX, it's not going to have better noise handling. No chance, zero. And of course if it did replace the 1DX, the price.

They certainly could have better noise handling at a low frame rate. FF High ISO IQ is certainly one of the attractions of the 1D X, but frame rate, AF system, and metering system are really more important ones, IMO. I could easily see a megapixel monster getting better IQ, both at high and low ISO along with a DR boost, at a much lower frame rate with a more basic AF system (although not as basic as the 6D).

Right. But not a 7D Mark II. It would be a very high-end FF camera to do that.

I don't believe that must be the case. Canon has repeatedly said that they will introduce some "revolutionary" new technology with the 7D II. The 7D line is an inferior line to the 1D X for a multitude of reasons. If the 7D II gets a better sensor, that doesn't invalidate the 1D X. For one, even if Canon manages to increase Q.E. with either a BSI sensor, or maybe a sensor with LighPipe tech, the smaller pixel size will intrinsically limit full well capacity. The 1D X has an FWC of over 90K, while the 7D has 20K. Even if they managed to double the Q.E. of the 7D, and achieve ~40k FWC, the 1D X will still be a superior high ISO sensor, will still have a faster frame rate, will still have a superior AF system, will still have the superior build and greater battery capacity.

Sensor, as I've said in the past, is not the sole factor in determining the quality of a camera. It is one of many, and I would put frame rate as well as AF system ahead of sensor as the primary factors that determine IQ in most cases, except in the few cases where your subject is static (i.e. landscapes.)

 

[East Wind Photography]

One of the biggest issues I see with a large mp crop sensor is the diffraction limitations. Might not be able to get past f5.6 without some loss of sharpness. I'm cautiously optimistic though. Even if they kept it at 18mp if they improved on noise and dr then it would be a plus.

AWSPhotography - well if you don't mind a grey-import then UK is not more expensive....

I figure the chances of Pro Canon equipment going wrong within warranty is pretty unlikely, plus all their equipment is made in a handful of locations in Asia. If you want full warranty, fair enough. I've bought three 2nd hand 1D series bodies without issues, so I figure grey import is less risk.

I've used procamera in the uk (no affiliation), and their price compares well to Adorama / B&H / Amazon.

Like you I am considering a 1Dx or MK III, but really want to wait and see if the new bodies have (even) better noise handling (I do nature, travel & landscapes), so need a mix of capabilities....

Unless the new body replaces the 1DX, it's not going to have better noise handling. No chance, zero. And of course if it did replace the 1DX, the price.

They certainly could have better noise handling at a low frame rate. FF High ISO IQ is certainly one of the attractions of the 1D X, but frame rate, AF system, and metering system are really more important ones, IMO. I could easily see a megapixel monster getting better IQ, both at high and low ISO along with a DR boost, at a much lower frame rate with a more basic AF system (although not as basic as the 6D).

Right. But not a 7D Mark II. It would be a very high-end FF camera to do that.

I don't believe that must be the case. Canon has repeatedly said that they will introduce some "revolutionary" new technology with the 7D II. The 7D line is an inferior line to the 1D X for a multitude of reasons. If the 7D II gets a better sensor, that doesn't invalidate the 1D X. For one, even if Canon manages to increase Q.E. with either a BSI sensor, or maybe a sensor with LighPipe tech, the smaller pixel size will intrinsically limit full well capacity. The 1D X has an FWC of over 90K, while the 7D has 20K. Even if they managed to double the Q.E. of the 7D, and achieve ~40k FWC, the 1D X will still be a superior high ISO sensor, will still have a faster frame rate, will still have a superior AF system, will still have the superior build and greater battery capacity.

Sensor, as I've said in the past, is not the sole factor in determining the quality of a camera. It is one of many, and I would put frame rate as well as AF system ahead of sensor as the primary factors that determine IQ in most cases, except in the few cases where your subject is static (i.e. landscapes.)

 

[jrista]

One of the biggest issues I see with a large mp crop sensor is the diffraction limitations. Might not be able to get past f5.6 without some loss of sharpness. I'm cautiously optimistic though. Even if they kept it at 18mp if they improved on noise and dr then it would be a plus.

A higher density sensor won't ever be less sharp than a lower density sensor, though. Image resolution and sharpness are the result of all components of an imaging system. A higher resolution sensor, even in a diffraction-limited context, simply allows you to approach the ideal resolution of the lens. See this thread:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13249.0

The only real issue with a higher density sensor is that it becomes more sensitive to camera shake. With the new 4-stop IS, Mode 3 for IS (which only activates it when the shutter is actually pressed), and the use of sturdy tripods, and when necessary/possible the use of a remote shutter release and mirror lockup, can greatly diminish the effects of camera shake on blur.

Diffraction, however, should never be the cause of less-sharp images at a higher resolution. If you do experience more softness with a higher resolution sensor, then it is probably the lens that is insufficient and causing blur, not the sensor. (Although, even then, given that system resolution is the RMS of the resolutions of each component in the system, a soft lens on a higher resolution sensor should still produce better results than a lower resolution sensor.)

 

[jrista]

Here are the two crops. The ISO 6400 one could have been exposed more to the right but things were happening fast and well..... The 1600 one the head was already bleeding past the edge but it worked. Only a small highlight was blown out.

Overall I'm very happy with the result...though the 6400 one could have been better.

Well, those results, at a pixel level, are much better than the 7D. On a normalized basis the 7D is probably as good as the ISO 1600 result, but the ISO 6400 is just amazing. Thanks for the crops!

 

[East Wind Photography]

Oh yeah I dont even use the 7D any more. My images are so much better with the 5DIII even when I crop to make up the APC-C size loss. The 7D is just a backup now.

Here are the two crops. The ISO 6400 one could have been exposed more to the right but things were happening fast and well..... The 1600 one the head was already bleeding past the edge but it worked. Only a small highlight was blown out.

Overall I'm very happy with the result...though the 6400 one could have been better.

Well, those results, at a pixel level, are much better than the 7D. On a normalized basis the 7D is probably as good as the ISO 1600 result, but the ISO 6400 is just amazing. Thanks for the crops!

 

[garyknrd]

How does it stack up to the 1D mark IV? I picked up a mark IV and was hoping the reduced pixel density would not be noticeable but it is very noticeable. When the AF hits on the 7D it smokes the IV. Or at least mine does. As far as detail goes. I only shoot birds and only have had the 7D and mark IV.
I was going to try the 5D III but with the poor performance in resolving of the IV I am a little hesitant.

 

[East Wind Photography]

I have not tried the 1DIV but I can say the 5DIII smokes the 7D even losing the 1.6 crop factor, it still is better than the 7D both in resolution and in lower noise...not to mention the vastly improved AF capabilities.

How does it stack up to the 1D mark IV? I picked up a mark IV and was hoping the reduced pixel density would not be noticeable but it is very noticeable. When the AF hits on the 7D it smokes the IV. Or at least mine does. As far as detail goes. I only shoot birds and only have had the 7D and mark IV.
I was going to try the 5D III but with the poor performance in resolving of the IV I am a little hesitant.

 

[Northstar]

Having both cameras for some time now I would agree with something bdunbar wrote earlier in this post.....the 1dx shadow recovery is noticeably better than the 5d3 at higher ISO's.....and the AF system is better for catching action/movement... no doubt about it.

The extra mp's of the 5d3 do come in handy in good light if your subject isn't moving much, and if that is the only type of wildlife photography that you're doing then yes, the 5d3 would be better.

But...I've seen a million shots of a bald eagle or bear or wolf...etc, just sitting still in good light...cropped in close. My point is that those shots get pretty boring pretty fast.....BUT:

1. If you saw two bald eagles fighting in mid air (as Gary samples has shown in the 1dx sample images section) you would want the speed of the 1dx

2. If you saw any big cat trying to capture prey...you would want the 1dx

3. If you saw a mother bear caring for her new cub in the shadows of a forest....you would want the 1dx.

4. If you saw two alpha timberwolves fighting for control of the pack at sunset...you would want the 1dx.

For me, these are the great wildlife photos/moments that I would want to capture because they are so much more interesting and special.....and the 1dx simply does it better.

 

[NWPhil]

wonder if you have a bad battery.
I got a loaner from CPS, and took it along a snowshoeing hike yesterday. I had it powered on the whole time, exposed to single digit temperatures - wind chill driven, and powdery snow. The is on the mounted 24-105 was on too.
Took 100 shots or so, and even after checking all the shots later in the comfort of a local bar, the charge was still above 85%
I find the grip ergonomics better than the 1dsmk3 or the 5Dmk2 with grip
Yes, the shutter it's a loud and solid clunk - and 12 fps scares nearby P&S shooters

 

[East Wind Photography]

It's possible. It was a loaner. Prior to getting the eval 1dx, I used a 5DIII. With the grip and two batteries it yields 3600mAH at 7.2V. LP-E4N for the 1DX is 2450mAH at 11.1V. Also considering that the 1DX does drive the AF systems faster and likely drains the battery faster than on a 5DIII, I did get used to shooting 1000+ shots before the battery would get anywhere near 50%(about 1 to 2 weeks of shooting +chimping).

Not saying the 1DX has a bad battery life but it does only accept one at a time (it's easy enough to just swap batteries when you need to) not that it even needs to be compared. Having the two batts in the 5DIII grip is just a convenience more than a practicality.

wonder if you have a bad battery.
I got a loaner from CPS, and took it along a snowshoeing hike yesterday. I had it powered on the whole time, exposed to single digit temperatures - wind chill driven, and powdery snow. The is on the mounted 24-105 was on too.
Took 100 shots or so, and even after checking all the shots later in the comfort of a local bar, the charge was still above 85%
I find the grip ergonomics better than the 1dsmk3 or the 5Dmk2 with grip
Yes, the shutter it's a loud and solid clunk - and 12 fps scares nearby P&S shooters