So ..... who wants a 1D III?

[Tannin]

Looks very nice.

• much better controls (yes! one-hand to change stuff!)
• ISO 3200 native, 6400 with expansion, said to be very clean
• 14-bit raw
• 10 frames per second
• 10MP 1.3 crop
• even better auto-focus
• Live view for macros and remote tethering
• Decent battery at last

They are taking orders now at $6500 Oz. I'm on the point of picking up the phone.

 

[Handruin]

LunarMist seems disappointed in the other thread. I think it looks nice also, but costly for what it offers IMHO.

What's wrong with the 20D's battery life. I find it rather commendable (even more so now that I have the battery bar with two of them).

 

[LunarMist]

I think Tony will really like it compared to the 20D. The 1D MK III's resolution is slightly less, but given the high ISO performance it will be reasonably usable with 500 and 2x. Generally 1D MK II/n users are happy with the announcement, but 1Ds MK II users since 2004 are mainly disappointed that there is no 1Ds MK III.

 

[Tannin]

For the sake of readability and having everything together in a one thread - one topic sort of way, I'll quote some some 1D III posts from the other thread:

mubs
News.com has a write-up about the new Canon EOS-1D Mark III.

LunarMist
Yeah, most of us were up late last night waiting for the official announcement and reading the white paper, etc. The 1D MK III is a terrible disappointment for people like me, still waiting for the 1Ds MK II's replacement.

Handruin
What points specifically made it a terrible disappointment? Was it the mild change sensor size among other things? I can't say the $4k price tag is worth what it offers. I'd also like to see what the top of the line brings in for the 1Ds MK II's replacement.
LunarMist
I'm not a PJ or sports photog, nor do I need to shoot in caves. Canon still has nothing to compare to the linear density of the D2X and no decent long zoom like the 200-400VR. At least if new Canon had 12MP at 8FPS, or better yet 14MP at 7 FPS, it would be of some use. Of course that would not allow for the higher ISOs.

------------------------

Taking the points in order, why is Lunar "terribly dissapointed"?

Well, mostly because of what Canon didn't do, rather than anything they did do - specifically, they didn't announce a IDs III. So it looks like it will be autumn before he gets what he is waiting for.

In the meantime, the ID III, as he notes, won't really provide anything he hasn't already got (at least, nothing relevant to his needs).

Doug's disappointment is harder to fathom. I agree that 10MP in a 1.3 sensor seems modest (I'd have guessed 12MP myself) but I imagine that they wouldn't have gone that way if they hadn't been sure that achieving the same speed and noise performance in a smaller pixel pitch wasn't going to be possible.

I'm not sure how much the speed will matter. There are certainly times when the 5 FPS of the 20D isn't really enough (birds in flight, mainly - there is no such thing as too much speed for flight shots), but whether 10 FPS as against 8.5 FPS would be a worthwhile difference, I'm not sure.

I'll drop in resolution slightly (assuming a given distance from a small subject, such as a bird). On the other hand, you have to set several advantages against that

• autofocus speed
• autofocus accuracy
• lower noise per pixel
• as a result of the lower noise, ability to shhot at higher ISOs, which translates into faster shutter speeds
• greater accuracy per pixel (because the pixels are bigger, we are further away from the other limiting factors, such as difraction at both lens and sensor levels)
• better controls = fewer mistakes = better pictures

That seems to add up to a winning combination, at least for what I do. The real question is should I buy a 1D III now, or wait and get a 1Ds III in spring (southern hemisphere spring, that is) - ..... or get a 1Ds II now? I'm leaning in the 1D III direction, but want to think it through more carefully first. In any case, it will be a month or two before they have stock, so I can afford to ponder a bit longer.

 

[ddrueding]

I'm wondering how long it will be before Tea runs out and gets a 1Ds II and a 1D III to help you make up your mind

 

[LunarMist]

Tony,

Buy the 1D MK III now and get a 1Ds MK III later if needed. Unless the latter is designed with a substantially lower pixel pitch, you will be better off with the former for most wildlife. The 1D series 1.25x crop factor is undesirable for landscapes however.

 

[mubs]

So ..... who wants a 1D III?

If you've suddenly turned Santa Claus and are handing them out, I'll take one!

 

[P5-133XL]

I've never been up to the task of spending that kind of money for a camera body: I want a Ds mark II for the price of a Rebal Ti or less. Sorry, but I was spoiled with film cameras where $1000-$1500 used to get top of the line Cannon SLR. It just grates at a very basic level that now I have to spend $4000-$6000 to get an equivilent in digital.

 

[Tannin]

Sorry Mubs, I only hae chocolate ones. Would you like a chocolate camera?

Lunar, that makes sense to me. The crop factor itself isn't an issue, as I see it, but where are the UWA lenses for 1.3? There isn't anything to replace my current (much loved) EF-S 10-22 (which gets more use than any other lens I own apart from the 500) or the equivalent 16-35 on full frame.

But that won't worry me: I have one and a half 20Ds for landscape work, with appropriate lenses. (Only one and a half because the newer one of the two just blew its shutter up. Simply worn out after its designed 100,000 actuations, I imagine, though I'd have thought I'd done maybe only 80K. Whatever, I have to send it off to Canon for a new shutter.)

If I was a serious landscape man, doubtless I'd be disatisfied with the 20D's resolution. But I'm not and I ain't. The 20Ds will do fine for most of the non-bird work for quite a while yet, and contnue to serve as instant spares in case something goes wrong with the 1D III.

If, on the other hand, a 20D goes down, I can't really use the 1D III as a spare, as most of my shortish lenses are EF-S. I'd have the 100-400 and the 50/1.8. I can live with that, and anyway, I'm not going to lose both 20Ds at the same time. (Assuming I don't sell one of them, that is.)

In fact, I'll probably wind up with this setup:

* 1D III: 500/4, with or without converters
* 20D: 100-400 for flight shots
* 20D: 10-22, various other shortish lenses for landscape, macro and general-purpose.

Of course, then I'll want another 1D to get better autofocus through the 100-400. No! There are limits! But, as you say, maybe I'll wind up with a IDs III as well one day.

Bloody hell Tea, get out of there!

Too late. Gahh! Tea just ate all the chocolate cameras. Sorry Mubs, you will have to go without. I had three 1D IIIs, a couple of 400Ds, a D200, and a KM 7D to give away.

Bloody monkeys.

 

[Tea]

Sorry Mubs.

 

[Tea]

Actually I feel a bit strange. Do you think I should have eaten all those flashlights?

 

[Tannin]

Well, look at it this way, Tea. At least now you will have something to smile about when people tell you that they think you think the sun shines out of your ... er .. no ... let's not go there.

 

[mubs]

:crap:

 

[e_dawg]

I was expecting a little more myself, especially from the sensor (but thankfully, the sensitivity/noise performance is not compromised) but it's not like the 1D/III is a bad camera... it's about expectations. Most Nikon guys were disappointed with the D40 when it was introduced. I thought "finally, this is the entry dSLR I have been waiting for". And I couldn't have been happier -- unlike every single digicam I have purchased in the past.

Not that I have done a lot of action photography, but 10 fps @ 10 MP and up to 3200 ISO with AF that's good enough to keep up with it is something I imagine would be fairly useful.

 

[e_dawg]

Any comments on how useful 14-bit RAW might be?

 

[Tannin]

For me, E_dawg, 14-bit raw will be handy but not especially useful. Most of my work is with birds, where you generally have only a reasonable dynamic range to contend with. Compare this with someone who does landscapes, where dynamic range is a constant struggle if the light is any good, and if the light isn't any good, you shouldn't be shooting at all. For the landscape guys, 14-bit will be a godsend ... but as Lunar has already pointed out, the 1D III ranks well down in the list of ideal landscape DSLRs - obviously behind the 1Ds II and the 12D, probably also inferior to the 20D/30D, K10D, and several Nikon models.

It will be really useful to those poor misguided souls who think they can create great art by beating a half-decent photograph into submission using Photoshop and a raw converter, sitting up all night and never resting until it doesn't look remotely like anything you ever actually saw in the real world. I've seen any number of tutorials showing you how to fuse multiple exposures of a high-contrast scene together in such a way as to produce a seriously ugly result ... and they all seem to think it's wonderful. Bahh... Still, more raw range woill give these morons more stuff to play with and, who knows, they might actually start turning out some decent photographs. But don't hold your breath. You'd do better to hand them a sheet of canvas and a paint set - if you want to do abstracts, why not do them the right way?

So, rant over for the moment, 14-bit raw would actually be more useful to me in my second camera, the spare I mostly use for landscapes.

But, yes, there will be value in it, particularly for certain species that have particularly bright or dark plumage, or when I'm working with a a rare one in poor light. (Essentially you only ever have to work in poor light with rare species: with common ones, you just come back when the light is better. Rare ones, you have to do the best you can with what you get.)

 

[Tea]

By the way, I've just been looking through the wrappers at the bottom of the chocolate camera box, and found one that I missed before.

Lunar, would you like a chocolate EOS 1Ds IV?

(It's gone a bit out of shape in the heat though. Should taste OK.)

 

[LunarMist]

More bits is better when using curves that squeeze details from the highlights and especially the shadows. Of course extra bits are only useful if the sensor has sufficiently low noise to provide meaningful data, which is presumably the case. I'd have less interest in the extra bits for landscapes than a wedding photog would for white dresses and black tuxes. Clipping some blacks in lanscapes is not a problem and often enhances the image. After all we were mostly using Velvia for landscapes until a few years ago and it had limited dynamic range.

In fact I would have more use for the extra bits for wildlife, where the lighting is usually uncontrolled and exposure sometimes less than perfect. It should also be better for dodging and burning which are often used on animals.

I'm not a fan of the HDR. I'd rather have a reasonably linear response curve and decently rounded toes and shoulders, use masks, and dodge and burn as needed.

 

[Handruin]

If you get a second and want to hear something fun, visit the canon site for the 1D III:

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos1dm3/#

Make sure to open the flash enabled site and skip the intro (play with sound ON).

Click on the top menu for "shooting" and then click on the sub menu for "continuous shooting". I'm curious what you think of the sound of the 1D III. It does make me smile a bit (it sounds like a damn machine gun).

 

[e_dawg]

More bits is better when using curves that squeeze details from the highlights and especially the shadows. [...] I'd have less interest in the extra bits for landscapes than a wedding photog would for white dresses and black tuxes.

How true... I can't tell you how often I've struggled with black and white formal wear.

 

[LunarMist]

If you get a second and want to hear something fun, visit the canon site for the 1D III:

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos1dm3/#

Make sure to open the flash enabled site and skip the intro (play with sound ON).

Click on the top menu for "shooting" and then click on the sub menu for "continuous shooting". I'm curious what you think of the sound of the 1D III. It does make me smile a bit (it sounds like a damn machine gun).

By most accounts 1D MK III is quieter than the 1vHS at 10FPS. That one was terribly loud at 10FPS and not so bad, but still loud, at 7FPS. After you use the fast cameras like F5 (w/9 cells), 1vHS (w/NP-E2), 1D MK II etc, for some time, the sounds are second nature. Current Canon bodies tend to be quite noisy compared to Nikons, which is sad since some of the earlier EOS bodies were very quiet. I have zero interest in the 1D MK III, so I won't bother to buy one for testing. It won't be as quiet as the 1N RS for sure.

 

[LunarMist]

How true... I can't tell you how often I've struggled with black and white formal wear.

Remember the old days and VPS II?

 

[e_dawg]

Remember the old days and VPS II?

Unfortunately, Lunar, you must think I'm a more experienced / serious a photog than I really am. I have never used such tailored-use film in my life. By the time I got into photography (and by no means professionally or semi-professionally, like yourself... just as a hobby), higher speed, more "mainstream" CN films were all I used. Kodak Royal Gold was what I used for anything "important" -- usually 400 ISO unless I knew it was going to be outside in daylight only. Later on, when Fuji Superia came out, it was all Superia 400.

 

[ddrueding]

What is this "film"?

 

[udaman]

It's here (October ).

For a trifle MSRP of $8k, the new IIIs

For me, E_dawg, 14-bit raw will be handy but not especially useful. Most of my work is with birds, where you generally have only a reasonable dynamic range to contend with. Compare this with someone who does landscapes, where dynamic range is a constant struggle if the light is any good, and if the light isn't any good, you shouldn't be shooting at all. For the landscape guys, 14-bit will be a godsend ... but as Lunar has already pointed out, the 1D III ranks well down in the list of ideal landscape DSLRs - obviously behind the 1Ds II and the 12D, probably also inferior to the 20D/30D, K10D, and several Nikon models.

It will be really useful to those poor misguided souls who think they can create great art by beating a half-decent photograph into submission using Photoshop and a raw converter, sitting up all night and never resting until it doesn't look remotely like anything you ever actually saw in the real world. I've seen any number of tutorials showing you how to fuse multiple exposures of a high-contrast scene together in such a way as to produce a seriously ugly result ... and they all seem to think it's wonderful. Bahh... Still, more raw range woill give these morons more stuff to play with and, who knows, they might actually start turning out some decent photographs. But don't hold your breath. You'd do better to hand them a sheet of canvas and a paint set - if you want to do abstracts, why not do them the right way?

So, rant over for the moment, 14-bit raw would actually be more useful to me in my second camera, the spare I mostly use for landscapes.

...

Hmm, that would be the HDR technique e_dawg mentioned on the PnS thread, yes :0 ?. Who really needs 21MP sensors? I'd rather have the DR range of the Fuji S5...so you don't have to do abstract art with HDR PS technique of multi-exposure sandwiching (though comparison shots on dpreview vs Canon 5D make the FF 5D look much sharper than the S5 for something like...xtra deep DOF flower shots where you're looking for ultimate sharpness to capture exquisite detail of some orchid flowers?).

Awe crap, the 'upgrades' Canon and everyone else is doing, more megapixels most will never use, but something like lower noise in poorly lit scenes, everyone can use that sans studio pros. 800IS, down graded to 3in LCD w/loss of the optical viewfinder...wonderful in bright sunlight, down graded to 8MP sensor...meh.

WTF, they removed the Firewire connector on the IIIs from the IIs! USB2.0 is slower than 1394a, why didn't they upgrade to a faster connection standard?

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos1dsmarkiii/

 

[Handruin]

I don't need 21MP, but would like to have it. For those large print situations, the extra size is nice. Not to mention cropping certain parts of a picture can be extremely use especially when there is tons of information available to use. Would I pay $8K for it...no, not unless my job was anything shot of doing photography for a living. I could see a 1D MKIII in the future, but not the 1DS.

The 1ds mkIII has two of the DIGIC III sensors that the 1D mkIII has. So the noise handling should be equally as great at high ISO's even though they pushed it to 21 MP. Shooting with a highly usable 1600 ISO with 14 bits is fantastic.

As for the firewire...I'd never use it anyway. I always transfer images from my card reader and never from the camera.

 

[Tannin]

I'm ordering a 40D to tide me over until the situation with the 1D III (supply, autofocus) and 1Ds III (supply, maybe autofocus as well if it is the same system?) clarifies.

Why a 40D? Mainly the sensor cleaner, better viewfinder, hope of improved autofocus, bigger buffer, especially the raw buffer. Most of the other stuff doen't matter too much to me. But the 20Ds are getting old and I'll need a backup for the 1 Series anyway, so ..... to hell with it. Bang goes the credit card again.

 

[Handruin]

I'd been really considering the 40D, but I'm waiting to see how it is with noise and if it suffers from the auto focus issue as the 1D III. I learned a lot from Rob Galbraith's in-depth article on the 1D III auto focus problems. I'm not sure the problem is as bad as it may seem. I'm really wondering if it's worth just saving the $1200 from the 40D and putting it towards the 1D.

 

[Tea]

Problem solved. No need to worry about which camera to buy, Tannin, I've fixed it all up for you.

 

[Tannin]

What?

 

[Tannin]

What did you do?

 

[Tea]

It's all down to influence and who you know, Old and Grumpy One. Don't worry, I've sorted it. Should be here this week.

 

[Tannin]

What should be here this week?

 

[Tea]

Our new 1D III.

 

[Tannin]

ulp!

 

[Handruin]

Nice, so you bought one? Where did you end up finding it?

 

[Tea]

I just rang Tannin's normal place, Handy, and used my charm.

 

[Handruin]

Tea, take a picture of your favorite banana when he gets it and show me the quality of it.

 

[mubs]

Tea, Tannin: Congrats! Who did you sell this time to finance the purchase of the new toy?

 

[Tea]

Tea, who did you sell this time to finance the purchase of the new toy?

Tannin

(Shhhh.... I haven't told him yet.)