# New 6D vs Used 1Ds Mark III body



## mikekx102

Hi, my name's Michael and I'm looking to upgrade from my 550D to either a 6D or a 1Ds mark iii. I like star photos and landscape shots, especially night ones, but also take portraits and the (very) occasional action shot. I'm just wondering which camera would be best for the job? I wouldn't use the wifi, GPS or video capabilities of the 6D but would love having a weather proof body, better resale value?, awesome build quality and awesome auto-focus on the 1Ds III. A big question is whether the 6D has far superior high-ISO performance? (the 1Ds iii goes to ISO 1600, while the 6D goes to 25600! both without expansion) and would give better looking photos (5 years newer). The 1Ds would probably be another $700 more which I'd only just be willing to spend.

My shooting style is that I normally spend an hour or so in one spot getting one setting perfect, then setting the next. I care about image quality foremost and will use the body with a 50mm f1.4 and a 24mm f1.4L ii mostly. My favourite photos are here: 
https://www.facebook.com/mikekx102/media_set?set=a.182016295154860.37705.100000394723350&type=1

What do you guys think?

Thanks!

Mike.


----------



## Big Mike

I don't have any personal experience with either...but I'll put my two cents in anyway.  

It sounds like you will most likely be shooting with a tripod or something for support?...and often shooting still subjects (besides the occasional action shot)?  If that's the case, then ISO is likely irrelevant because you can probably shoot at 100 anyway.  

I would guess that the newer 6D would offer better pure image quality...but I have heard a few disappointing reviews of the 6D, mainly about the fit and finish of the body.  And that's where you're going to see the biggest difference with a 1 series body.  If you need (or want) the ruggedness of a professional body...then it's an easy choice.  But *if* a 6D can give you better image quality, then a $20 rain cover may give you what you need.


----------



## Derrel

I did a DxO Mark comparison, and made a screen capture of the side-by-side sensor performance comparison. Not much improvement in the intervening half-decade. The dynamic range of both these cameras is around two full f/stops worse than any number of modern Nikon cameras...but then, the two companies use fundamentally different sensor fabrication technology and one still relies on on-chip noise reduction. In High-ISO scenarios, the newer 6D is going to be better. In other imaging metrics, there's been almost no improvement. In build and handling, the 1Ds III is still a top-grade, flagship-level instrument, whereas the 6D is an econo-box type build...an EOS ELAN-GRADE body, with a new sensor in it.

The real-world implications are this: a 1-series body looks BIG, feels big, and IS heavy. It is a BIG, HEAVY, high-profile camera that people can not stop looking at. It's an encumbrance many times, to have to always carry a big-A$$ camera like this (I know, I own two big-A$$ bodies and several smaller ones) in many situations. The 6D on the other hand, is what's called a *half-height* body. Smaller, lighter, less-conspicuous. It "looks" kinda' "consumer", and so it does not make you look like Joe Photo, or Jimmy Creeper, at the playground or amusement park, and so on. I believe that in many social photography situations, people respond more naturally to a smaller, less-conspicuous camera and smaller lenses.


----------



## imagemaker46

The 1D Mklll is considered one of Canons big failures, most of the pros that I know that got them ended up having terrible back focus issues, I know that Canon wanted to rush this camera out before Nikon's D3, but they made the mistake of replacing the great 1D Mkll with a bug filled camera.  Not all the mklll bodies had focusing isses, if you get your hands on a good one, consider yourself lucky.    Personally I'd look for a mklV


----------



## gsgary

imagemaker46 said:


> The 1D Mklll is considered one of Canons big failures, most of the pros that I know that got them ended up having terrible back focus issues, I know that Canon wanted to rush this camera out before Nikon's D3, but they made the mistake of replacing the great 1D Mkll with a bug filled camera.  Not all the mklll bodies had focusing isses, if you get your hands on a good one, consider yourself lucky.    Personally I'd look for a mklV



He said 1Ds MK3 not 1Dmk3


----------



## Mach0

gsgary said:


> He said 1Ds MK3 not 1Dmk3



I can see that to be confusing.


----------



## imagemaker46

The 1Ds also had some issues, if it had all the firmware updates done then it should be fine.


----------



## gsgary

imagemaker46 said:


> The 1Ds also had some issues, if it had all the firmware updates done then it should be fine.



Only issue i know of was the veiw finder was slightly out of level with the sensor in the first few


----------



## rexbobcat

The 6D has a much better sensor than the 1Ds.

The 1DsIII has worse image performance than the 5D Mark II because it's a little bit older.

The autofocus on the 1Ds will probably beat the 6D for speed though.


----------



## mikekx102

Derrel said:


> I did a DxO Mark comparison, and made a screen capture of the side-by-side sensor performance comparison. Not much improvement in the intervening half-decade. The dynamic range of both these cameras is around two full f/stops worse than any number of modern Nikon cameras...but then, the two companies use fundamentally different sensor fabrication technology and one still relies on on-chip noise reduction. In High-ISO scenarios, the newer 6D is going to be better. In other imaging metrics, there's been almost no improvement. In build and handling, the 1Ds III is still a top-grade, flagship-level instrument, whereas the 6D is an econo-box type build...an EOS ELAN-GRADE body, with a new sensor in it.
> 
> The real-world implications are this: a 1-series body looks BIG, feels big, and IS heavy. It is a BIG, HEAVY, high-profile camera that people can not stop looking at. It's an encumbrance many times, to have to always carry a big-A$$ camera like this (I know, I own two big-A$$ bodies and several smaller ones) in many situations. The 6D on the other hand, is what's called a *half-height* body. Smaller, lighter, less-conspicuous. It "looks" kinda' "consumer", and so it does not make you look like Joe Photo, or Jimmy Creeper, at the playground or amusement park, and so on. I believe that in many social photography situations, people respond more naturally to a smaller, less-conspicuous camera and smaller lenses.
> 
> View attachment 50022





rexbobcat said:


> The 6D has a much better sensor than the 1Ds.
> 
> The 1DsIII has worse image performance than the 5D Mark II because it's a little bit older.
> 
> The autofocus on the 1Ds will probably beat the 6D for speed though.



Thankyou so much - Thats fantastic info and helped me to make a definate choice =)  6D it is! Thanks guys!

Mike.


----------



## mikekx102

In fact, i've done some more research and found out that the 6D has a better sensor on all accounts, than the 1ds mark iii but also it has GPS and WIFI. Gps is nice, but wifi means you can use a mobile as a remote shutter! Awesome!! The centre point can also focus with just moon light and is more sensitive than the 5d mark iii or the 1dx even. The rest of the auto focus isn't as good, and I'm not saying it'll get there quick, but it'll do it. So it sounds like the perfect camera for me =D


----------



## Derrel

Yeah...the 6D is also compact and light and sleek. The pictures I have seen on-line coming out of the 6D look pretty good. I looked at your page, and I think the 6D will be a really nice camera for you!


----------

