1D MkIIn to 1D MkIII upgrade worthwhile?

grotty

grotty

Messages
2,980
Name
Joe
Edit My Images
No
I'm seriously considering selling my lovely 1D MkIIn and replacing with a MkIII.

I am really happy with it and love the handling and image quality. What I'd hope the improvements would be are;

- Better High ISO performance
- Slightly Higher pixel count (obviously)
- Larger screen/more intuitive menu (the MkII multi-button pressing is a bit cack-handed)
- Newer Digic Processors
- Better battery life

There are some other improved features of course. I'm certain there'll be a good few members here who have made this change. So I'd like to know your thoughts and experiences.

Thanks.
 
can't really comment on this - so should probably shut up, but the jump from mk2 to mk4 is phenomenal - especially in the high ISO department, so if the mk2 to mk3 is half as good it would probably be worth it
 
You know you'd eventually jump to the mkIV anyway so how about going straight to the newer camera if funds permit? Or hire a mkIII for a weekend for a tryout.
 
Funds don't permit a mkIV, hiring is a possibility...although I'm sure I'll like it but would be interested to hear peoples experiences who have made the same change.
 
Dod would be the man to answer this.

He has owned both (at the same time) so should give a decent opinion!



From a N***n user that is. :shake:


:lol:
 
I've a MK2 so am keeping an eye on this one, I cant afford a IV.
Oddly I like the multi-button pressing and I'd miss not having it. I have a 10D and a 50D and wish they had the 1D button arrangements - weirdo I suppose.

Matt
 
Ive had both at the same time and the mk3 walks all over the mk2N in every way, simple as that. I sold the mk3 in november hoping the price of the mk4 will drop but I might end up buying another mk3.
 
MatBin said:
I've a MK2 so am keeping an eye on this one, I cant afford a IV.
Oddly I like the multi-button pressing and I'd miss not having it. I have a 10D and a 50D and wish they had the 1D button arrangements - weirdo I suppose.

Matt
Click to expand...

I too really like the multi-button arragement. But I'm looking at potentially changing my second body to a MKIII this year as I find more often than not I end-up borowing a MKIII from a good friend or hiring it.

IMO (not having owned the III but used it a bit) the MKIII has a much better UI and High ISO, perhaps also the edge on outer point focusing in low-light too (Centre MKII and III columns are the same performance wise).

Apart from that they're both essentially the same.
 
admirable said:
Dod would be the man to answer this.

He has owned both (at the same time) so should give a decent opinion!



From a N***n user that is. :shake:


:lol:
Click to expand...

why do you think I went Nikon? ;)
 
I have both these cameras (bought the mkIII from Dod ahen he changed!!),

- Better High ISO performance - yes it is better, but do you NEED the high ISO for what you do or could you use flash in darker conditions? For me flash is not an option so the best possible ISO is a necessity
- Slightly Higher pixel count (obviously) Made no difference to me as I don't print bigger than 24x30" and the IIN handles that easily
- Larger screen/more intuitive menu (the MkII multi-button pressing is a bit cack-handed) once I had used it I hardly noticed the difference in screen size, if you had the mkII there would have been a noticable difference though. Menu is a bit easier but there are a lot more options for the setup so that pretty much cancels out the ease! They both have the option to put your most used menu things in the same place and once the menu is set you don't usually need it much as most shooting things are then controlled by the buttons.
- Newer Digic Processors Not noticed any difference in the speed of the processors
- Better battery life Battery life is better and I have not yet needed the second battery even when shooting in very cold temps, saying that I have never needed more than 2 batteries for the IIN and it does not take long to change one!

I still have and use the mkII and although its a backup now I will not sell it for a second mkIII, but will wait and go for the mkIV at some point. Now that I have the mkIII for the higher ISO for my use I don't see a big enough difference anywhere else to spend money I could use for better purposes. Its going to come down to personal preference and what you are shooting, for me needing higher shutter speeds in low light the mkIII wins especially in winter time!!
 
i shoot on a mkIIn and picked up a mkIII yday as i needed the better iso.

It feels strange not having to press the buttons for the menues how you do on the mkII, for some reason i had grown to like that.

The dedicated AF button is ok, personally i prefer using the * button as its more comfortable on the thumb so need to try and change that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top