40D or 1D Mk111

I currrently own a 20D
I have just been given a latest version Mk3 with the latest software, I will have it for about 5 days, I am expecting it not to give AF problems (I hope). My initial reaction is WOW what a beauty!
A few weeks ago I used a 40D and was amazed at the performance.
If I like the Mk3 could anyone please summarise the BIG benefits it would give over the 40D. My main interests are bird photography and macro work and I intend to get to grips with some landscapes before too long.

Will it for example produce noticeably less noisy images?
Will it make a big difference that the no of shots per sec is higher? (I doubt it but you may disagree)
There is a three fold difference in price and I am not a professional photographer so I am wondering of the Mk3 would be overkill for me. (Weather proofing not an issue for me)
I suspect AF at f8 will be very useful but at a price!

I am also advised that the next new camera - the 50D may be worthwhile waiting for as Canon will have probably caught up with Nikon on the producing relatively noise free images at high ISO - any views on this too please.

Thanks Jon

Hi Michael,

I have had my MarkIII since July 2007...If I had to do it all over again I would NOT buy it again..MarkIII is a Beta Version Camera Model. Every few months Canon issues a patch & the patch courses new problems. I you are happy with a 40D don't waste you money on a MarkIII maybe an "N" version of this model will be better in future.

Renate

I think you should try them both if you can and compare the image quality. The 1D3 images are much less noisy as far as I can tell. The higher frame rate is nice for birds in flight or motion but the 6 fps the 40D has, are not bad either. The 1.6x crop sensor might come in handy if you photograph small birds and/or birds you can't get close to.

Axel,

You are lucky to have a good MarkIII...but chances to get one is less then 50/50. When they work the are good,,,when the don't they are paperweights.

As long as you are aware of the problems about the problems..OK! Buy it!

Renate

I have owned the 20d, I still own the 5d and MK2n. Given your needs and thoughts expressed, stay with the 40d.

This is one of the most common questions I have been asked over the last 5 or so year or so leading workshops. Unless you really need the benefits of a PRO body, like AF at F8, weather sealing, high frame rate, or others I wouldnt recommend it. Its a common misconception that the public has when they see a great picture they attribute the IQ to the body and want to rush out and buy one.

I think that the camera body is the least important link in the imaging chain BTW (with modern D-SLRs).

But you also have to consider the money factor. You can buy 4 x 40D bodies for the price of a MKIII or buy 2 x 40D bodies and take a short trip or a workshop.

Robert

ROT makes some excellent points that must be factored in to your decision. I own both cameras, and the image quality of the Mark III far surpasses that of the 40D IMO. AF at f/8 is nice if you want to throw a 2x on your 500 or 600 f/4. It's built like a tank (which is both good and bad- sturdy but heavy). The 40D has the added crop factor, and is a good camera in its own right, but it's not in the same league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert O'Toole

But you also have to consider the money factor. You can buy 4 x 40D bodies for the price of a MKIII or buy 2 x 40D bodies and take a short trip or a workshop.

Robert

---

I think this is a very valid point, that has meant much to me. I love to dream about the next and greatest gear just as everybody else! But for me, I realize that the money spent for all the various workshops and trips accelerated my understanding, knowledge, and made me explore ways to get the most from what I have. Also wish to add that the $20 admission to BPN is by far the best educational investment around!

Thanks everyone, I am going to use the Mk3 on Monday at a local bird reserve. i should be able to test the AF perfornace in flight. AF at f8 will be nice, the high frame rate will be nice - are they both essential - I don't know but I doubt it. I reckon my 20D produces great images with good lenses ( or I do - sometimes!)
If I can't see some major difference I will go down the line of a 40D or wait for the 50D. Yes I know I could wait for a 60D but I suspect the 50D will not be too long to wait and if there are no big benefits over the 40D I will get the 40D cheaper in any event. Does that make sense? Jus for info a pal of mine who is a pro has a Mk2 and it sits on the shelf ...he bought two 40Ds instead of the Mk3 and reckons they are the bees' knees!!
Jon

Jonathan, I know this is old hat now, but I would say keep well away from the MkIII, in many ways the camera is superb image quality and high iso are stunning.

Down side it is one hard machine to get right..... I moved to Nikon after problems with 6 bodies. If you need to get a new camera then take your chance in you can wait in the long term you will be better off.

Have a read of this article http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1967

Just out of interest the SUN newspaper have changed their Canon kit to Nikon for sports work. I am not saying change system as Im sure Canon will deliver a pro body soon but at present in the Uk they are loosing pro users daily because of issues with the MKIII

Good link Steve!

I follow the sportsshooter site and found that article very interesting! I have referred a couple of people to it also.

Robert

Thanks Steve, the body I have at present is supposed to be the or one of the first in the country to be fully corrected (I think we have all heard something like that before!!)
Anyhow I will try it out today but I must admit fix or no fix, the enormous increase in price over a 40D, plus a a deep rooted suspicion over potential performance is going to leave me very sceptically.
I suppose the only advantage for me would be the AF at f8, I suspect the image quality of the 40D would be as good or better than the 20D - which from my point of view is already very good.
Jon

Have fun with the 1D3 today and keep us posted what you think. I think you are right that the 40D is better than the 20D in many respects.

Well I have used the EOS 1D Mk3 today with my 500mm f4L IS coupled with a 2x Canon converter. I know someone is going to say well you couldn't stretch things much more than that - this is true but if the camera doesn't perform then there is no point in buying it - well from my view that is.
I was amazed at the frame speed - and also the sheer waste of shots! Don't need it! (OK a bit tongue in cheek but just don't need such high speed. Yes I know there is that magic moment but just don't need that speed.)
The time taken to download all those files - nagh just don't have the patience!
The AF ability - no better than my 20D. Yes I did use Custom functions but who wants to have to set so many different parameters for so may circumstances - I don't. The magnification is not significantly better than my 20D plus 1.4TC due to the Mk3 1.3 crop factor. All in all nice camera but not for me the 40D will do nicely!
Jon

I am on my 2nd MkIII since June 2007 and if I had it to do over again I think that I would rather be shot in my foot!
I just received my camera, my 100-400 IS and my 24-70 f/2.8 back from Canon on Friday, everything is supposed to be repaired and in factory specs. This body is also one of the "blue dot" bodies. I shot some macro work, one frog image which I posted here and I am very happy with!!! However I went out yesterday morning to shoot some eagles in flight, when I got there the sun went in and the clouds began to roll in............ the focal point on my images shows to be right on yet there is not an image that is even close to sharp! I later shot a Great Blue Heron standing in the river in the shade with sunlight coming in from the left and this image was sharper than I had ever anticipated. The 100-400 all the way out at 400 is not the sharpest. however I was able to crop this image heavily and still have a decent image. Sooooooooooo, I spent all of this money almost 1 year ago & I still don't feel like I have a camera that will perform as it is supposed to, the problem is that I am running out of fight. Canon service was very fast and cordial and really great to deal with, I just think that these cameras are hit or miss and I have missed twice. Again, let me say that since this last repair, my portrait images and my macro images that I have shot so far look great, absolutely a difference from before I sent it in, however the Birds in Flight shots were very disappointing..........maybe I need to go back and re-set all of the custom functions in order to be able to shoot BIF.
Thanks for the time.

Stuart, I feel for you, I have a pal here in UK - he has sent his 1D Mk3 back twice for different problems. He wonders what to do next, he thought he bought the bee's kneees but the camera is unreliable. He does wedding phtography apart from natural history - so excuses just don't cut the mustard. He has got to the point that he wants a replacement 40D and cash back.
Not much help - but I hope you get the issues sorted, good luck.
Jon

Sounds like a reasonable decision, and it is going to save you a lot of money. :) Have fun with the 40D. The people I know who use it, are quite happy with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonathan Michael Ashton

Well I have used the EOS 1D Mk3 today with my 500mm f4L IS coupled with a 2x Canon converter. I know someone is going to say well you couldn't stretch things much more than that - this is true but if the camera doesn't perform then there is no point in buying it - well from my view that is.
I was amazed at the frame speed - and also the sheer waste of shots! Don't need it! (OK a bit tongue in cheek but just don't need such high speed. Yes I know there is that magic moment but just don't need that speed.)
The time taken to download all those files - nagh just don't have the patience!
The AF ability - no better than my 20D. Yes I did use Custom functions but who wants to have to set so many different parameters for so may circumstances - I don't. The magnification is not significantly better than my 20D plus 1.4TC due to the Mk3 1.3 crop factor. All in all nice camera but not for me the 40D will do nicely!
Jon

---