Canon 1DX vs 5DIII Wildlife Comparison

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#101
East Wind Photography said:
Well it's good to know CPS has more than one to loan out! :)

Please post some caparisons when you get a chance, particularly if you can take some in the snow. Lots of highlights and would be good comparison of the 5DIII and 1DX at reproducing such. We dont get a lot of snow here but Im planning a polar bear trip and would be nice to see if the 1DX does any better when everything is white except the eyes! ;)

RMC33 said:
East Wind Photography said:
LOL! The one I had ended in serial 508.

RMC33 said:
Just got my CPS 1Dx yesterday! GF hid it from me and it was on the table this AM with breakfast with a full charge and my 200 f/2 attached!

Can't wait to compare the two now!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Bummer 338 here. I have to say, I love the build quality already. The manual is a bit daunting but there are a lot of Cfn's I like that the 5d3 Lacks. Glad I have a bunch of time off in the next two weeks to shoot.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

My plan is tomorrow to head up to Lake Tahoe and do a few landscape pannos. Should be a good side by side as there is a lot of snow and black igneous rock to test the highs and lows (going to shoot regular, 3 and 5 shot HDR's). Going to use my 200 f/2, 50 f/1.4 and 8-15 Fish for most of my shooting. I may bust out my rental 24 TS-E too and do a few buildings. My biggest concern is going to be sports, and I will be shooting a skier/snowboarder x(cross) event on Thursday March 28. It is a late day to night event so that should push a few extremes. I am a bit worried loosing the crop factor and wish I had a 1DIV to toss into the mix but I didn't feel like spending the money on a rental. All of the testing aside from the sports event will be side by side 1Dx - 5dIII.
 
Upvote 0
#102
Yes and put the 5DIII into Silent drive mode (3 fps only though) and you can hardly hear it. Clearly that mode was designed for weddings but it's scary silent and useful when you dont need 6 fps.

garyknrd said:
Thank's allot for the comparison. Well thought out and very informative. You mentioned shutter noise. I just got a Mark IV and it is the first time I can remember when a bird actually heard the noise and flew. It is very noisy also. My friend has a 5D III and it is so quiet compared to mine.
www.flickr.com/photos/avianphotos
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#103
Morning folks, 1st post here so forgive me if I seems a little noob ish, :D

I'm currently saving for my 1dx (I have a very supportive wife and no kids) after just getting my 600 mk1 and I currently use a 5d mk2. Right so that's where I'm currently coming from just so that ppl know.

I read this thread with great interest as the 1dx is going to be a major spend for me, just like the 600 was before it.

I shoot wildlife exclusively so this thread was even more important to read.
As a wildlife photographer I can tell you that I miss 12fps (as currently I can only go 3) I miss the high iso noise handling (1600 is as far as I can acceptably push it on the mk2) and with the locations I am going to I will need the weather sealing that the 5d doesn't have.

Also as a wildlife photographer my 1st concern is the welfare of the wildlife itself, so you say that the 12fps is so loud it scares of the subject? Then my friend you are WAY too close! I have had the use of a 1dmk 4 (as the kingfisher photographs on my site will a testify ) and was within 15mtrs of it and it didn't scare off. But that's my personal opinion and shouldn't be taken as criticism in any way. Is there some kind of wrap you could put on the camera (a bit like camera armour) that would deaden the sound?

As has already been posted here, Andy rouse, a world wide acclaimed wildlife photographer tested and subsequently bought 2 dx's, and as its his living he's gambling with I'm sure he know what he's doing. Please the importantance in this here is that he used to exclusively shoot with Nikon. He found the dx so good he bought into the system to use it. Why didn't he look at the 5d3? Because it doesn't have the weather sealing needed, the fps (btw he never mentioned how loud it was or that he had scared off any subjects) or the extreme high iso noise handling that the dx.

I have looked at your site and you have some wonderful images (especially of the foxes :) ) but you're not exclusively a wildlife photographer, and I doubt very much that you will be going to to the jungle, desert or arctic/Antarctic or locations that will really push the camera to its limits just to photograph a subject which lives there.

I'm pleased for you that the 5d3 works for you, the mk2 that I have is a great all round camera and I can only imagine how much better the mk3 is above that.

But for me, as I am going to the desert, jungles, arctic and Antarctic .... I'll continue to save and stick with my idea of getting a dx

Oh and as a side note ....don't use an iPad to make long posts as I just have :o
 
Upvote 0
#104
First off welcome to the CR forum. Lots of helpful and not so helpful people here but none the less a very useful forum. I'm actually using an iPod right now so I'm not going to leave a long post.

For some/most you have to get close to your subject or you are cropping way too much. The 1dX noise wise would be fine if you shoot from a truck or noisy public area. But from a blind or edge of a lake it's way too loud.

1dx is way better sealed and seems to offer better high ISO iq and I'm talking above ISO 3200. Below that and the 5d3 is comparable. In fact the noise patterns are smaller on the 5d3 due to the higher pixel density.

Don't know where you live but if you can try to rent or eval the 1dx before you buy I would recommend that since its a large purchase. The 1dx will be light years better than the 5d2.

AWSPhotography said:
Morning folks, 1st post here so forgive me if I seems a little noob ish, :D

I'm currently saving for my 1dx (I have a very supportive wife and no kids) after just getting my 600 mk1 and I currently use a 5d mk2. Right so that's where I'm currently coming from just so that ppl know.

I read this thread with great interest as the 1dx is going to be a major spend for me, just like the 600 was before it.

I shoot wildlife exclusively so this thread was even more important to read.
As a wildlife photographer I can tell you that I miss 12fps (as currently I can only go 3) I miss the high iso noise handling (1600 is as far as I can acceptably push it on the mk2) and with the locations I am going to I will need the weather sealing that the 5d doesn't have.

Also as a wildlife photographer my 1st concern is the welfare of the wildlife itself, so you say that the 12fps is so loud it scares of the subject? Then my friend you are WAY too close! I have had the use of a 1dmk 4 (as the kingfisher photographs on my site will a testify ) and was within 15mtrs of it and it didn't scare off. But that's my personal opinion and shouldn't be taken as criticism in any way. Is there some kind of wrap you could put on the camera (a bit like camera armour) that would deaden the sound?

As has already been posted here, Andy rouse, a world wide acclaimed wildlife photographer tested and subsequently bought 2 dx's, and as its his living he's gambling with I'm sure he know what he's doing. Please the importantance in this here is that he used to exclusively shoot with Nikon. He found the dx so good he bought into the system to use it. Why didn't he look at the 5d3? Because it doesn't have the weather sealing needed, the fps (btw he never mentioned how loud it was or that he had scared off any subjects) or the extreme high iso noise handling that the dx.

I have looked at your site and you have some wonderful images (especially of the foxes :) ) but you're not exclusively a wildlife photographer, and I doubt very much that you will be going to to the jungle, desert or arctic/Antarctic or locations that will really push the camera to its limits just to photograph a subject which lives there.

I'm pleased for you that the 5d3 works for you, the mk2 that I have is a great all round camera and I can only imagine how much better the mk3 is above that.

But for me, as I am going to the desert, jungles, arctic and Antarctic .... I'll continue to save and stick with my idea of getting a dx

Oh and as a side note ....don't use an iPad to make long posts as I just have :o
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#105
Thank you for the reply.

Given what has been discussed in this thread I think your suggestion of hiring to eval the dx is now a must for me and will be looking to do just that :)

I live in the uk (awsphotography.co.uk) so hiring shouldn't be a problem.

Once again ty for the welcome
 
Upvote 0
#106
For those reading who are new to DSLRs or dont quite understand what jrista is talking about, here is a link to a good article that explains why you should expose right and how to use the histogram to maximize S/N ratio.

He points out that by exposing to reduce s/n this way also effectively reduces your ISO. For instances where you need fast shutter speeds it may not be worth sacrificing shutter speed to reduce the recorded noise.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml


jrista said:
East Wind Photography said:
Yes I agree. These are not the best exposed images. As I said the lighting was awful and the shot with the 5DIII it had just started sleeting. It was overexposed by about 2 stops already. The 1DX was exposed about 1 stop over. I tried to find a couple of shots that were challenging in comparison.
Click to expand...

I am not sure I would use the word "overexposed", if I understand what you are getting at. If you are referring to the EC scale in the viewfinder that the camera meter updates, then I would say the meter gravely MISS-METERED those images. Keep in mind, the camera meter is rather dumb...it generally aims for an ~18% gray average tone. Given the sky in those photos, the meter was actually underexposing. I would actually say it probably under-exposed by two to three full stops!

We have exposure compensation for a reason, and if we have to boost exposure with EC, then that does not mean we are over exposing....it means we are correcting the meters incorrect automatic exposure settings. I would have happily blown the sky in those images entirely, if it allowed me to get better exposure on the eagle itself. I'd have pushed exposure as far as I could, to the point where the feathers of the eagles head were in the 240 RGB range, then corrected DOWN in post. By literally over-exposing, then pushing exposure down in post, you actually mitigate noise. I have some examples of this with a dragonfly I photographed a while back...I accidentally overexposed the original shots by some three stops, and corrected in post. Compared to the later shots, the corrected ones that were overexposed had almost zero visible noise, while one that was "correctly" exposed in camera had a plenty of visible noise. I'll see if I can dig those up.

Noise is not actually caused by high ISO...it is caused by too little light. The ISO setting simply changes the readout whitepoint, which intrinsically limits the maximum exposure level. If you push to ISO 1000, but then expose such that your whites are below an RGB value of 200...you are simply exacerbating the problem of not having enough light. If you cannot use a longer shutter speed, then the best way to maximize exposure is to increase ISO. It doesn't get any more light down the lens, but it reads out the exposure you have in the least-noisy way. Higher in-camera ISO will almost always trump post-process exposure push. Pushing a noisy exposure in post just makes the noise more apparent. Better to increase ISO, maximize the exposure in-camera (and even blow the sky such that it is entirely white when it is gray and overcast, since the sky isn't the subject and doesn't really matter), then pull the exposure down in post. You'll increase your signal to noise ratio, which is preserved with the post-process pull.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#107
East Wind Photography said:
For those reading who are new to DSLRs or dont quite understand what jrista is talking about, here is a link to a good article that explains why you should expose right and how to use the histogram to maximize S/N ratio.

He points out that by exposing to reduce s/n this way also effectively reduces your ISO. For instances where you need fast shutter speeds it may not be worth sacrificing shutter speed to reduce the recorded noise.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
Click to expand...

Here are a couple more links, from Art Morris' blog:

Learning to Think Like a Pro In The Field
Exposure Confusion and Misconceptions Clarified

Intriguingly enough, the notion of using manual and metering off the sky (or any generally even-toned subject) and deriving EC from that actually works quite well. At least, for subjects that have white in them. (I am still having trouble with dark subjects in manual, as I previously used to use Av pretty exclusively.)
 
Upvote 0
#108
I have a 1dx and a 5D3 so I don't have an angle on this.

They are both great cameras and if you can take good shots with one you will be able to with the other. If I had to choose just one for wildlife it would be the 1Dx, no question or hesitation.

For me the 5D3 has two advantages. First its lighter to carry round so for a days walking about its easier to carry. Secondly the shutter is noticeable quieter, but for me this is no great advantage as I don't find the noise of the shutter a problem even up close. The extra mega pixels is not significant for me so I don't count it as an advantage.

For everything else going that matters the 1Dx is significantly better or has the edge. I'm not going into details or this post will miss my point.

You may or may not find the advantages worth the money. But for me it is definitely worth the cost of the 1Dx. That said I still use the 5D3 for wildlife. I will often take just the 5D3 but if I'm after the best shot I can get for wildlife it will be the 1Dx, probable with the other interested bag with a different length lens on ready.

If you have choose between these cameras you are very lucky as either one will do fine. :)
 
Upvote 0
#110
So,

I love the 1Dx (for sports) compared to both my 5d3 and old (very dead) 7D. 12 FPS is very useful (I keep the High and low at 12/8 since the 5d3 fills 6/3 Reason: Faster movement requires higher FPS to get the shot while slower more fluid movement can be caught with lower FPS) for ANY type of transitional motion from say a jump to a rail etc. or a 900 deg + rotation. Build and operation are amazing, never used a 1 series before and it was all mostly intuitive other then a few of the C fn. I had to read up on and test to get a full understanding. I love the old style on off switch for the grip. Memo recording is super cool and very useful, wish it could be mapped to the AF ON button so I could take a memo while shooting. Built in VF curtain is nice (have not used yet but plan on it).


I will be going this weekend on a nature walk (packing: 5d3, 1Dx, 400 f/2.8 II, 1.4 TC and 70-200 II + Versa 33 tripod with a PG-02 FG) with a friend who is a trail guide in the area. Plan on doing a bit of birding and wildlife capture but we are supposed to get some serious snow this weekend so... we shall see. Ill post some images as I get to them.
 
Upvote 0
#112
CarlTN said:
Wtg RMC33!! Will you really expose your 400 to heavy snow, or do you have a bag or blanket for it?
Click to expand...

I usually just toss my ski jacket over the whole thing as I hate shooting encumbered. Snow generaly just piles up due to the white coating on the lens not heating up. I have had days where my 7D would be warm to the touch (32 F sunny) but the lens was same as ambient and as such no melt factor. The Nikon shooter I know uses a lens cover because even on freezing days the sun can melt wind blown snow on the big black lenses.
 
Upvote 0
#113
RMC33 said:
CarlTN said:
Wtg RMC33!! Will you really expose your 400 to heavy snow, or do you have a bag or blanket for it?
Click to expand...

I usually just toss my ski jacket over the whole thing as I hate shooting encumbered. Snow generaly just piles up due to the white coating on the lens not heating up. I have had days where my 7D would be warm to the touch (32 F sunny) but the lens was same as ambient and as such no melt factor. The Nikon shooter I know uses a lens cover because even on freezing days the sun can melt wind blown snow on the big black lenses.
Click to expand...

Excellent point, I hadn't even thought of the snow melt factor, I was just thinking of a heavy amount trying to cram its way into the cracks, especially at the camera mount.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Fbimages
Svalbard and Arctic pack ice, summer 2025
Replies
16
Views
968
ArdoSmith
A
GirlsAreBeautiful
From 5D Mark III to R5 Mark II - photographer review - first 1 month and a half - 12k shots
Replies
30
Views
1K
GirlsAreBeautiful
GirlsAreBeautiful
Josh
Hobbiest photographer upgrading from R8
Replies
6
Views
2K
dcm
dcm
ahsanford
Finally retiring the 5D3, would love RF migration gameplan tips
Replies
27
Views
4K
OldDudePhotog
O
D
Delkin CFExpress 2TB Locking EOS R3
Replies
3
Views
255
DPhotoR
D
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu