Canon EOS 1D Mark III

**warthog** · 07-05-2007, 04:51 PM

Is ridiculous. I got to play around with one last night.

The LiveView feature was pretty cool for fireworks.

Anybody got one? My buddy went from a 10D to this. He is stoked, as you can imagine.

**cj001f** · 07-05-2007, 05:05 PM

that is unpossible!

**warthog** · 07-05-2007, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by cj001f

that is unpossible!

Why? Was I dreaming?

**cj001f** · 07-05-2007, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by warthog

Why? Was I dreaming?

were you?

I was dreaming about one until I looked at my bank account!

**warthog** · 07-05-2007, 10:12 PM

Want one? He is still on 4 waiting lists. You can have his spot.

**MeatPuppet** · 07-05-2007, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by warthog

Anybody got one? My buddy went from a 10D to this. He is stoked, as you can imagine.

Gawd, what a mind rush. He's got to be giddy right now. I had a 10D. It was good for it's time. It's time was past a couple of years ago. I can't imagine going from that to the 1DMKIII. Heady time, I'm sure.

**summit** · 07-05-2007, 11:26 PM

Imagine going backwards from a EOS-3 to a 20D... ugh... I still can't get over it and I won't stop bitching until Canon makes the EOS-3D

**MeatPuppet** · 07-05-2007, 11:45 PM

Originally Posted by Summit

Imagine going backwards from a EOS-3 to a 20D... ugh... I still can't get over it and I won't stop bitching until Canon makes the EOS-3D

Well, that's what you get for going from a professional body to a prosumer body. You have no body to blame but yourself

I'm still a little confused as to why Canon hasn't incorporated things like eye controlled auto focus into their digital bodies. It's almost as though they want to keep some of their better technologies for their film bodies only. Considering the price, I would think they would put their best efforts into the digital bodies.

Then again, I would be wrong to think that.

**Tippster** · 07-06-2007, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by MeatPuppet

I'm still a little confused as to why Canon hasn't incorporated things like eye controlled auto focus into their digital bodies. It's almost as though they want to keep some of their better technologies for their film bodies only. Considering the price, I would think they would put their best efforts into the digital bodies.

Then again, I would be wrong to think that.

They only have it in ONE film camera, the Elan 7NE -- not one of their pro-level 35mm cameras (the 1v or the 3). I think it's a gadget that takes up too much room used for other features. Maybe there's no room for it at all in the DSLRs.

**warthog** · 07-06-2007, 12:30 PM

Yeah- he went from the 10D to this, cause he started making some extra cash with his camera.

The Liveview is rad. Especially for those weird angle shots where it would be tough to focus through the viewfinder. No auto focus in that mode, though. You wouldn't want it anyway.

Summit- why did you do that? I can't imaging selling my D200 for a D80.

**summit** · 07-06-2007, 12:35 PM

I too have wondered why that feature isn't present yet. I think they are keeping it in reserve to introduce when the competition gets tougher.

Originally Posted by Tippster

They only have it in ONE film camera, the Elan 7NE -- not one of their pro-level 35mm cameras (the 1v or the 3). I think it's a gadget that takes up too much room used for other features. Maybe there's no room for it at all in the DSLRs.

INCORRECT. It most certainly has been in their pro level cameras: the A2e and the EOS 3.

ECF first appeared in the A2e/EOS 5, then in the Elan IIe (EOS 50e) then the EOS 3, then the Elan 7e, then Elan 7ne.

It is a very usefull and awesome feature. Having owned the A2e, the Elan IIe, and the EOS 3, I miss the feature very much.

Originally Posted by warthog

Summit- why did you do that? I can't imaging selling my D200 for a D80.

When I did photography for money, I could justify the EOS 3/PBE2 etc... but since I just do it for fun now, it was hard to justify $4500 for a professional digital SLR

Going from what was arguably one of the 3 best pro 35mm AF SLRs ever made (ever) to a 20D is hard even after 1.5 years...

**Tippster** · 07-06-2007, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by Summit

INCORRECT. It most certainly has been in their pro level cameras: the A2e and the EOS 3.

Regarding the DSLRs, especially say the MkIII, If the pros liked it they'd have it in there, believe me.

**AstroPax** · 07-07-2007, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by warthog

Anybody got one?

Well, I was considering a complete R & R with a Canon/MKIII system, to occur sometime in the near future...

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...01#post1165401

HOWEVER....I think I'll wait on the swap until the MKIII auto-hocus-focus-pocus business is resolved.

After having a first hand experience with a MKIII and associated images, I'm not really impressed...it's not meeting expectations...and the stuff I get from my current D2Xs is substantially more consistent.

-Astro

**midget** · 07-11-2007, 11:55 PM

the a2e was the elan 7e

**Gunder** · 07-12-2007, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by midget

the a2e was the elan 7e

Nope. Two different cameras

**Gunder** · 07-12-2007, 12:07 AM

Originally Posted by Summit

I too have wondered why that feature isn't present yet. I think they are keeping it in reserve to introduce when the competition gets tougher.

INCORRECT. It most certainly has been in their pro level cameras: the A2e and the EOS 3.

ECF first appeared in the A2e/EOS 5, then in the Elan IIe (EOS 50e) then the EOS 3, then the Elan 7e, then Elan 7ne.

True, but I would argue that the EOS3 and the A2/e and Eos5 where really only high end consumer cameras they diffretly are not built to the same caliber as the pro gear.

**midget** · 07-12-2007, 03:50 AM

Originally Posted by Gunder

Nope. Two different cameras

thought one was the us named version and the other was the other named version for the rest of the world.

whatever, it was a bad idea and i'm glad they stopped making it.

**summit** · 07-12-2007, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by Gunder

True, but I would argue that the EOS3 and the A2/e and Eos5 where really only high end consumer cameras they diffretly are not built to the same caliber as the pro gear.

I'd have to disagree on the EOS 3. It was built to and/or above the standards of the pro cameras that preceded it in the EOS-1 line.

I would say the A2 at the time of its release in 1992 would probably fit the same argument fairly well for the time.

**Gunder** · 07-12-2007, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by Summit

I'd have to disagree on the EOS 3. It was built to and/or above the standards of the pro cameras that preceded it in the EOS-1 line.

Feature wise yes, but build quality I dont think so.... I.E. Plastic Vs. Metal. Even back in the 630 days the bodies where metal.

**summit** · 07-12-2007, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by Gunder

Feature wise yes, but build quality I dont think so.... I.E. Plastic Vs. Metal. Even back in the 630 days the bodies where metal.

The EOS-3 has a metal frame. The EOS-3's polycarbonate shell is quite thick and durable. It was weatherproofed and built to the same standard as the EOS-1n. This is according to Canon as well as my opinion.

According to Canon: The 1 and the 1n were polycarbonate shells over aluminum frames and the 3 was a polycarbonate shell over a magnesium frame. I'm not trying to say the 3 is a match for the 1v (which came after it) with its magnesium shell and additional weather sealing, but the EOS 3 holds its own or is superior to anything Canon made before it both durability-wise and feature-wise. IMHO the only things the 1 and the 1n had on the 3 were 100% vs 98% VF cover, diopter correction (which I found annoying), and 1/3 stop faster x-synch.

I break things a lot. Over the years I killed 5 film P&S cameras, 4 digital P&S, a 35mm AF SLR (850), and a 35mm MF SLR (OM4) each within a year of purchase. I used my EOS-3 for 6 years and found it to be very durable. I still have it.

**Tippster** · 07-12-2007, 09:06 PM

Isn't that akin to calling the 5D a professional camera?

Another HUGE difference between the EOS-1 and EOS-3 was the tweakability, no? Customizable gamma curves, presets for WB, sharpness, etc. hell, even the powerpacks were different IIRC.

There's a big difference between "for use by professional photographers" and "the best features available."

**summit** · 07-12-2007, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Tippster

Another HUGE difference between the EOS-1 and EOS-3 was the tweakability, no? Customizable gamma curves, presets for WB, sharpness, etc. hell, even the powerpacks were different IIRC.

Tip... what are you talking about? We are discussing 35mm AF SLRs now...

And the EOS-3 has more "tweakability" versus the predecessor EOS-1n and EOS-1 which are 4 and 8 year older pro models. And for the power boosters, the PB-E1 works on all of the EOS-1/3 series. The PB-E2 only works on the EOS-3 and the EOS-1v.

There's a big difference between "for use by professional photographers" and "the best features available."

The EOS-3 fits both of those definitions. It *DRASTICALLY* outclassed its pro predecessors in features and matched them in design. It was only surpassed by the 1v two years later, which had little extra in features but a whole lot more in robustness than any other 35mm AF SLR ever made.

OK... to continue back in time... what was the better 35mm MF/AE SLR: The Olympus OM-4Ti, the Nikon F3, or the Canon T90? I *really* loved the OM4Ti but I know most people would say the T90 or the F3...