5d3 v 1dmk4

Because its a totally different machine built for a totally different job and they shouldn't be compared with each other.
 
The 1D IV has so many more virtues than just the AF though (the biggest improvement in the 5DIII).
 
x2. The 1D series is Canon's pro line where as the 5D is a consumer model and so they typically hold there money better.

The differences in build quality alone are substantial let alone the feature set.
 
I think that a lot of people are expecting used MkIV prices to fall significantly with the introduction of the 1Dx. I'm not sure that this will happen. For amateur wildlife and sports photographers the 1.3 crop is a real plus and the 1Dx is very expensive. £2000 more than the list of a MkIV. That's a great deal of money and I think that good low shutter count MkIV's will always find a ready market and fetch good money. It could be that the MkIV becomes very sought after and prices will reflect this accordingly.
 
MkIV prices will hold up well as all 1D bodies do. MKIIIs still get a good price for a body that was released in May 07 and superceeded in late 2009.

As the price of the 1Dx comes down slowly so the price of the MkIV will go down slowly.
 
Exactly Mathew. I bet more wedding photographers buy the 5D3 than the 1D series.
 
Also remember that this is still the latest 1.3x crop camera made by Canon, so prices may hold till its a like-for-like replacement comes out.
 
I agree I think prices will hold above the £2K mark for another year or year and a half.
 
bigrob said:
Exactly Mathew. I bet more wedding photographers buy the 5D3 than the 1D series.
Click to expand...

Indeed, okay I've got no experience of a 1D series body but having used the 5D3 for the last few months it's an immense camera (y)
 
MWHCVT said:
I think that it's a little misleading to say that the two are not comparable, or that one is pro level and the other is consumer level
Click to expand...
Why, one is purely aimed at sports and photo journalists and the other at wedding.landscape/studio togs so not really comparable.
 
They are comparable, and when you compare them, either one will come out on top based on what you need it to do.

Previously the 1DIV was the best (Canon) camera for what I need a camera to do. Now I think the 5DIII is, so I may swap (and if I make a bit of cash in the process because the 1D is worth more that's even better ;) ).

The 1D will still be better for some people though.
 
Jayst84 said:
They are comparable, and when you compare them, either one will come out on top based on what you need it to do.

Previously the 1DIV was the best (Canon) camera for what I need a camera to do. Now I think the 5DIII is, so I may swap (and if I make a bit of cash in the process because the 1D is worth more that's even better ;) ).

The 1D will still be better for some people though.
Click to expand...

Exactly the point I was referring to, that people with 1DIV bodies are swapping to A 5DIII. I can't think of many other occasions where people trade their camera for another and end up with a profit.
 
they're not making a profit though are they?
 
If you decide to sell your 1DIV and purchase a 5DIII you will most likley end up with more cash in your pocket but the sum left over will not be profit...........or will highly unlikely to be profit.
 
Jayst84 said:
Would likely be some of people to come to that decision, yes. Many photojournalists will also come to the opposite one. No need to hurt your head Gary.
Click to expand...
:LOL: I seriously doubt and photo journalist would look at a 5d3 in comparisson to a 1DMK IV let alone a 1DX, bear in mind most photo journos have their kit supplied by their papers/agencies.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Why, one is purely aimed at sports and photo journalists and the other at wedding.landscape/studio togs so not really comparable.
Click to expand...

So are you suggesting that only sports and photo journalists are professionals then since according to you the 5D3 is a consumer grade camera :wacky:
 
I think apart from the crop issue that it's more to to with build quality on the 1 series cameras. That's not to say that the MkIII is not built well but the 1 series cameras are renowned for it.

I'm sure that canon could build a camera with most of the features of the MkIV and put it in a less robust body (upgraded 7 D possibly as it has quite a bit going for it already) and the price would reflect this. Perhaps this is what they are planning to do.

I think Canon have made a mistake by dropping the MkIV so soon unless the price of the 1Dx comes down fairly significantly. There are already some reports of small issues with the 1Dx that canon will have to resolve soon.

I will be waiting for another 6 months to see what the price does when stocks of 1Dx's are better and then may make the change.

If low count MkIV's are fetching good prices at that time then so much the better.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Erm, no, where did i say that :wacky:
Click to expand...

Well you said the 5D3 is a consumer rather than professional camera :LOL: :thinking: In my case that is true maybe but :thinking: I'm sure that there are a lot of people that consider the 5D series to a pro grade of camera (y)
 
MWHCVT said:
Well you said the 5D3 is a consumer rather than professional camera :LOL:
Click to expand...
Where on earth did i ever say that, someone else said it was a "consumer" camera but i didn't, you really need to read this topic again and start using the quote tags if youre going to correctly qoute what i did or didnt say :wacky:
 
MWHCVT said:
Well you said the 5D3 is a consumer rather than professional camera :LOL: :thinking: In my case that is true maybe but :thinking: I'm sure that there are a lot of people that consider the 5D series to a pro grade of camera (y)
Click to expand...

A pro camera is ANY camera that makes a professional photographer money.

However when talking about bodies, to me pro refers to the top end, built in grip, fully weather sealed etc type. So the mkiii,in my eyes, should be referred to as a consumer camera ( or prosumer to use another term) even though it will doubtless be used by many working pros, just as the mkii was before it.
 
Last edited:
martyp said:
x2. The 1D series is Canon's pro line where as the 5D is a consumer model and so they typically hold there money better.

The differences in build quality alone are substantial let alone the feature set.
Click to expand...

My response to the above not from yourself

MWHCVT said:
I think that it's a little misleading to say that the two are not comparable, or that one is pro level and the other is consumer level
Click to expand...

Then you're response to me

Gary Coyle said:
Why, one is purely aimed at sports and photo journalists and the other at wedding.landscape/studio togs so not really comparable.
Click to expand...

Gary Coyle said:
Where on earth did i ever say that, someone else said it was a "consumer" camera but i didn't, you really need to read this topic again and start using the quote tags if youre going to correctly qoute what i did or didnt say :wacky:
Click to expand...

So I do apologise as it wasn't you that made initial comment, please accept my apology Gary
 
No worries Matthew, for what its worth i think the 5D3 should be classed as a Pro grade camera, there will be many full time pro's earning a good living from it, i personally wouldn't choose it for sports/photo journo stuff though.
 
EspressoJunkie said:
A pro camera is ANY camera that makes a professional photographer money.

However when talking about bodies, to me pro refers to the top end, built in grip, fully weather sealed etc type. So the mkiii,in my eyes, should be referred to as a consumer camera ( or prosumer to use another term) even though it will doubtless be used by many working pros, just as the mkii was before it.
Click to expand...

Your first point I cannot argue with however the second point, I'd rather go with Canon and Nikon and since this is about canon, for the bodies referred to are considered as Pro spec bodies (y)

Gary Coyle said:
No worries Matthew, for what its worth i think the 5D3 should be classed as a Pro grade camera, there will be many full time pro's earning a good living from it, i personally wouldn't choose it for sports/photo journo stuff though.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you (y)
 
Peter10d said:
A bit confused as the majority of threads I can find on the net comparing the above bodies, favour the newer 5d3, so why does second hand 1dmk4 bodies appear to hold a second hand price which is greater than a new 5d3:thinking:
Click to expand...
I think because the 1dmk4 still has some nice spec and is a more robust body. Remember, it is one of Canon's top of the line cameras, but was released 3 years ago.
 
admirable said:
If you decide to sell your 1DIV and purchase a 5DIII you will most likley end up with more cash in your pocket but the sum left over will not be profit...........or will highly unlikely to be profit.
Click to expand...

Ok, point taken....I should have phrased it as follows:
If you decide to sell your 1DIV and purchase a 5D3, as a perceived upgrade, it will be one of the few occasions, when someone upgrades (in their eyes) where they will not be out of pocket for the new body:D
 
Technology advances rapidly and Canon have now changed their autofocus arrangement on the 1Dx and 5DMkIII and moved away from their 45 point system and initial reports are full of praise for it. It is arguably better then the MKIV's.

I would like to try a MkIII against my MkIV for the photography that I enjoy and see how it compares. The sticking point for me would be the full frame against the crop. I know that people will say with the bigger sensor you can crop into it more.

I really think that the loss of the MkIV is a shame. Canon seem to be trying to force people down one route with the 1Dx and not everyone wants to go that way. With the massive prices of the latest MKII 400,500 and 600 lenses they are out of reach for most people who don't earn a living from their camera. And this is reflected in used prices for the MkI lenses.

Perhaps Canon have something up their sleeve which will bring a high spec crop sensor camera to the market again.
 
EspressoJunkie said:
A pro camera is ANY camera that makes a professional photographer money.

However when talking about bodies, to me pro refers to the top end, built in grip, fully weather sealed etc type. So the mkiii,in my eyes, should be referred to as a consumer camera ( or prosumer to use another term) even though it will doubtless be used by many working pros, just as the mkii was before it.
Click to expand...

Agree with this, a close friend of mine works for Canon and he was told Canon only class the 1 series body's as Pro body's
 
ljphil78 said:
Agree with this, a close friend of mine works for Canon and he was told Canon only class the 1 series body's as Pro body's
Click to expand...

Not according to their (uk) web site, 1D and 5D listed following this statement:-

"Discover the ideal set-up for any wedding photographer. Our professional full frame DSLR cameras provide reliability and responsiveness, while our specialist lenses make images stand out from the competition....."
 
1d mk4 and 5d mk3 are very different beasts, more so than the sum of their specification suggests. As such they will split opinions on being comparative or not.

I know that I'd consider a move to a 5d mk3 as a downgrade, which is because I would be losing key features that make a difference in the 'real' world to me. For example, off the top of my head:


  • FPS speed.
  • Native F/8 autofocus.
  • C.Fn1-14 (apply shooting/metering mode to AE button) - So handy!
  • Flash sync speed.
  • View finder shutter.
  • 2x Processors.
  • Lower rear LCD.
  • Degree of weather sealing.
  • Battery performance.
  • Level of customisation.
  • Build quality/component longevity.
  • Residual value.

The 5d mk3 is still a fantastic camera and the fact it gets compared to 1d bodies speaks volumes.
 
In an effort to get things back on track on to the subject that the OP intended as I and some others and successfully taken this thread well of track :bang:

Following this link

Will take you to a page putting the stat's for both camera side by side on a few techy areas the 5D3 is that little bit ahead of the 1D4 but then the 5 is three years the junior to the 1 so you would expect some advancement :LOL: where the 1D has the edge is on things like fps etc and to some extent build but I'm not so sure that the 5 is that far behind on that front, there is the crop factor issue too but I'm less convinced that's an issue as the larger sensor will allow you to make that crop in PP and still have roughly the same pixel count as the 1D4 and IMO the 5D3 is at least comparable if not a slightly better handler of High ISO

Matt
 
I dont know a right lot about the new 5D but I do have a mk2 and a 1dmk1V and for what I shoot most of the time full frame is no use to me and the 5d gets very little use, I have shot a few weddings but I will still pick up the 1 series first (2 card slots are handy) I shoot a lot of birds,Aviation, kite surfing and powerboat racing with a 500mm lens sometimes with extenders so the 1.3 crop works very well for me and I guess a lot of others, so standing at coniston recorts week most of the time in the rain the full frame 5D just does not cut it for me.I dont think you should comare these bodies, they are aimed at different markets,so for what I shoot it dont get better than a mk1V.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top