Stepping up to a 1D3 (from a 40D)

[py6km]

Hey everyone - I need a bit of a sanity check. I have the chance to get a used 1D3 (a model which came off the Canon production line after the mirror assembly fix, so is not one which was recalled/repaired, but should be one with the corrected hardware and most current firmware in from the get go). Current owner reports zero focus problems, and is generally very happy with it (but wants a 1Ds3).

Is the move from a 40D to a 1D3 a bit bonkers for an enthusiastic amateur? I know that the improved AF (especially the number of AF points), the high-ISO and the microadjustment will be welcomed, but the 40D is a very decent camera, and at 6FPS is no slouch.

I'm not overly bothered about the increase in size, because I've used a grip on the 40D, and it was fine. If I'm ever in a situation where weight/size are issues, I don't take an SLR anyway, just use the G9.

I'm currently testing the water/used market with my 40D, but can anyone see any downsides to this possible move? (I have no EF-S glass)

[Radiohead]

You can talk yourself out of it easily enough...

If you have the money then do it, you're a long time dead. A different class of camera entirely.

[RvanR]

Originally Posted by py6km

Hey everyone - I need a bit of a sanity check.

I think this would only be a good idea if the ability to shoot sport is high on your priority list. The main feature of the 1D3 is the 10 frames per second. The image quality will be better than your 40D and it is full frame, but the 'drawback' is that it will show up any shortcomings in your lenses (thus enticing you further down the upgrade path.)

You say that weight is not an issue, but have you handled one of the 1 series? It would be a shame to spend a lot of dosh and then not take out your DSLR half the time.

The other reason to go for it would be if it is ridiculously cheap (less than £1,500) Beware of how many shutter actuations it has had. These cameras are often used by pros and 250,000 actuations is not out of the ordinary.

If I were you I would wait until the updated 5D comes out (rumoured to be in September) and then pick up a good second hand 5D, which has a 12.8 Mega pixel sensor instead of the 10.1 on the 1D3. Or buy a new 5DII if you have the cash, because that is very likely to be a better camera for the serious amateur than the 1D3.

[Radiohead]

It's not FF - it's APS-H, so a 1.3x crop for field of view.

[RvanR]

Originally Posted by Radiohead

It's not FF - it's APS-H, so a 1.3x crop for field of view.

True, my mistake. Another reason not to buy...

[py6km]

Thanks. I actually think that the 1.3 crop factor is a nice compromise between the APS-C and FF - it should give nicer images but still give some help if you want to reach distant subjects. I don't want a 5D as I feel it's a bit long in the tooth now, and I need a faster camera than it appears to be - I'm not sure if there even will be an announcement this year. Lots of rumours saying yes, but there have been lots of rumours for the last two year about a 5Dii ! In any case, I could be taking shots between now and then, and still get one of those by selling the 1D3 (and hopefully wouldn't lose a lot as I'd already have bought 2nd hand).

It's unlikely to be less than £1500, but shouldn't be much more than that given the discussions we've had so far. I think it has about 30,000 on the clock.

Is it significantly heavier than a 40D + grip + 2 batteries?

[Tobers]

The 1Dmk3 is a totally different kettle of fish to a 40D. I went from a 30D to my 1D and the 1D is just a superb tool. It is about the same weight (possibly a bit lighter) than a 40D with grip and 2 batteries. My 30D with grip and 1 battery was pretty much identical weight.

Regardless of whether you need 10fps, you'll find the speed of the camera in just about everything to be a joy to use. Focus, tracking, button pressing, general use etc is just bril. Image quality is amazing - I find mine great for landscapes as it happens.

There are some really nice touches such as the viewfind blind for when you are doing self timer or remote triggered shots. The customisation facilities are endless. Dynamic range is very good and the RAW files are excellent. 2 card slots bla bla bla.

At the end of the day, if you like real top quality kit and can afford it, then go for it.

[Bristol Pete]

Originally Posted by Tobers

The 1Dmk3 is a totally different kettle of fish to a 40D. I went from a 30D to my 1D and the 1D is just a superb tool. It is about the same weight (possibly a bit lighter) than a 40D with grip and 2 batteries. My 30D with grip and 1 battery was pretty much identical weight.

Regardless of whether you need 10fps, you'll find the speed of the camera in just about everything to be a joy to use. Focus, tracking, button pressing, general use etc is just bril. Image quality is amazing - I find mine great for landscapes as it happens.

There are some really nice touches such as the viewfind blind for when you are doing self timer or remote triggered shots. The customisation facilities are endless. Dynamic range is very good and the RAW files are excellent. 2 card slots bla bla bla.

At the end of the day, if you like real top quality kit and can afford it, then go for it.

I concur. Top, top camera.

However, did you not dump Nikon due to the 'weight' issues ?

[Radiohead]

Originally Posted by RvanR

True, my mistake. Another reason not to buy...

Not per se...

[Bristol Pete]

Originally Posted by RvanR

I think this would only be a good idea if the ability to shoot sport is high on your priority list. The main feature of the 1D3 is the 10 frames per second. The image quality will be better than your 40D and it is full frame, but the 'drawback' is that it will show up any shortcomings in your lenses (thus enticing you further down the upgrade path.)

You say that weight is not an issue, but have you handled one of the 1 series? It would be a shame to spend a lot of dosh and then not take out your DSLR half the time.

The other reason to go for it would be if it is ridiculously cheap (less than £1,500) Beware of how many shutter actuations it has had. These cameras are often used by pros and 250,000 actuations is not out of the ordinary.

If I were you I would wait until the updated 5D comes out (rumoured to be in September) and then pick up a good second hand 5D, which has a 12.8 Mega pixel sensor instead of the 10.1 on the 1D3. Or buy a new 5DII if you have the cash, because that is very likely to be a better camera for the serious amateur than the 1D3.

The Mark III is far more than a sports camera and thats a fact......

PQ will be better than the 40D is detail, colour, tone etc as it has dual Digic 3 processing which makes a huge difference.

[milkmanchris]

Originally Posted by Radiohead

If you have the money then do it, you're a long time dead.

And there are no pockets in shrouds.

[py6km]

Many thanks to everyone who's replied so far.

Originally Posted by Bristol Pete

I concur. Top, top camera.

However, did you not dump Nikon due to the 'weight' issues ?

It was one of the main reasons, yes. However, now, I visit places where I can either take/use an SLR or I can't, so it's less of an issue and I've a G9 for times when the SLR isn't an option. In fact, despite the fact that my reasons for switching may have been slightly misplaced I'm actually glad I did make the change because (despite missing some things) I have to say that I find the Canon lens line up much better for me because I can get superb glass in the range I like for much less than the Nikon counterpart (if there is a counterpart, which in some cases there isn't), and I'm loving the couple of primes I have.

It's good that people have confirmed that it isn't just a dedicated sports camera - I guess the option's there, but it can be used for whatever you want really.

I wouldn't normally be considering this to be honest, as I'm very pleased with the 40D, but I know the guy selling it, and so I can pretty much guarantee that it'll be in excellent nick and therefore should represent a 'bargain' compared to the cost new.

I'm pleased to read that it has an ISO-shift function as well, akin to the auto-iso found in higher end Nikons now - I miss that feature (the 40D implementation is odd and half-baked).

I'll be taking a look at it and having a play later this week hopefully, so will see how I get on.

Still a bit worried about the focus issue though so will try to test it out in harsh light whilst tracking something relatively fast (which is apparently where the focus still falls down).

Also, is there any problem with static subjects in one shot (I know Rob Galbraith still reports that there is a static subject focus problem in AI Servo, but I'd never take pictures of static subjects in Servo mode anyway, only one shot, or possibly AI Focus).

[denno75uk]

I can't offer advice on the camera itself, I've no experience of it. And I'm often too lazy to be even an enthusiastic amateur.
There's no doubt that a camera like the 1D3 is a serious camera and perhaps arguably, overkill for an amateur/hobbyist.
But like most people have said, if you want it and can afford it, why the hell shouldn't you have one. Would you enjoy owning it? Would it put a smile on your face every time you use it? Aren't they the only things you need to consider?
The lenses you have are up to the job, ie they wouldn't look out of place on a 1D3. I bet mounting the 24-105 L on it for the first time would make any doubts you have fade away in a heartbeat.
It's sometimes hard to follow the heart when the head insists on being infuriatingly sensible, but as you say yourself, it's not exactly a reckless decision.
GO FOR IT!!!

[milkmanchris]

I think the question needs to be asked, whats your style?

Looking at your kit list, the possibilities of crossing to Nikon are not miles away, if you want to go the sports and PJ route (which is the 1D3's specialty) then I would save a little longer an get the D3.

The mk3 just did not do it for me, great package just lots of little niggles, most of which you have highlighted.

The glass you need to get the best out of it makes it a v large commitment, one that needs to be right (for you).

[py6km]

Originally Posted by denno75uk

I can't offer advice on the camera itself, I've no experience of it. And I'm often too lazy to be even an enthusiastic amateur.
There's no doubt that a camera like the 1D3 is a serious camera and perhaps arguably, overkill for an amateur/hobbyist.
But like most people have said, if you want it and can afford it, why the hell shouldn't you have one. Would you enjoy owning it? Would it put a smile on your face every time you use it? Aren't they the only things you need to consider?
The lenses you have are up to the job, ie they wouldn't look out of place on a 1D3. I bet mounting the 24-105 L on it for the first time would make any doubts you have fade away in a heartbeat.
It's sometimes hard to follow the heart when the head insists on being infuriatingly sensible, but as you say yourself, it's not exactly a reckless decision.
GO FOR IT!!!

Thanks. I would like it, and if I can sell my 40D then I can afford it, but I think the thing is that I actually feel a little bit guilty about it when (for example) there are so many people struggling to even pay for things like their heating in the current economic conditions. I'm not sure why I feel like that because I've worked hard to get where I am, and continue to do so. Still makes me feel a little uneasy though