canon 1dmk111 v nikon d3

can anyone compare the 2cameras - performances wth auto focus and high iso ratings, i have heard mixed comments on both, andy rouse wrote rave reviews on canon 1d mk111 but also wrote/commented that the d3 was the best auto focus and high iso(1000 +) he has used and has now changed to nikon d3 - any comments on both cameras/performances etc

jeff

Well i had a 1D MK3 and now have a D3, I personally wouldnt touch a 1D3 with a bargepole,The AF is fast but inconsistant or was with the one i had and in low light i ended up using manual focus as it would front and back focus with a still object-utter rubbish for a Pro body,The Nikon D3 is far superior in both AF and image quality IMO as well as the benefits of being able to use extenders with all the AF points-A real quality product-However i find the Nikon D300 to be 'THE' body for birds on flight as its AF is awesome,The D3 has just has a firmware upgrade that is meant to improve its already impressive AF so maybe thats as good as the D300-I havent had chance to test it since the upgrade, Andy Rouse wrote a review shortly after getting the 1D3 and it was only after using it for some time that the problems really started to show-i was the same and thought mine was fine for the first couple of months,If i look at the images taken now and compare to the 1D3 the D3 images look better-sharper and do not need the amount of processing that the 1D3 files needed although they were pretty good, High ISO the D3 is King no doubts

Dave

I have never used a 1D mk3 but FWIW, last year I was photographing leaping dolphins next to Charlie Phillips using one and performance-wise I don't think there was any difference at all with my D3, even to the point where we both missed the same shots when the cameras focused on water droplets that got in the way.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Terry

Jeff I have to say I would agree with Dave. Like most I upgraded to the MKIII x 2 and at times been very disappointed. I have compared certain shots like for like over last year with Andy and certainly the Nikon outstrips the Canon. However, the real 'plus' point for me is the Sensor cleaning of Canon, but hey, that is not really key in getting the image! I can't change as I have too much money tied up in Canon, but if you have the chance swop to 'the Dark side'

Steve

I think a question such as this is very unfair, as you will always get people having a bad experience prepared to speak out, but nothing from the hundreds of Pros who have never had a moments problem. Statistics state that if someone has a bad experience with anything, they will tell 10 people, if they are perfectly happy with something they might tell 3 at most.

I can only say what i have experienced but also i have read tonnes of stuff on the web that back up what i have said-A £900 Nikon D300 is a better camera than a £2400 Canon 1D3, If you are looking for a canon body then i would say look at a 1D2N or a 1DS2 but if you are looking at the Dark side then you can do no worse than look at the D300 and the D3, Both camps make good gear so its not a Nikon verus Canon thing but you asked specifically about the 1D3 so thats my thoughts

Dave

How can this be unfair? Bad experience, yes! Bought the MK3 went back for 'the fix' still poor, body replaced. Purchased a second body. Quote 'compared like for like shot ie setting the same on both Nikon & Canon. Nikon was consistently better. From a loyal Canon user! No axe to grind, just my thoughts, like DC. It is up to the person who asked the question to make the dicision.

Steve

I can only speak from my own experience and am certainly not as accomplished as Steve or Dave.

I owned 2 MKIII up until last November, I now have a D3. Both my canons were 2008 models. The first stopped working after only 1000 shots and canons response was quote " thats electronics for you, you have 2 years warranty". That left me thinking what will happen after two years and I lost total confidence in the system. I was lucky to be in a position to change over. I know many are not.

I shoot alot indoors and hate Flash so the high ISO really sealed it for me. I have to stay my D3 was amazing straight out of the box and has had very few changes to it since compared to the MKIII.

Just one last thing before I get lambasted from Canon users, my mate bought his MKIII at the same time as mine (job lot bought 3 at the same time) and his has been bullet proof and In still waiting for my Nikon 200-400 to turn up, ordered last November.

I use both cameras pretty regularly, (1D3, 1DSMk3 and a D3) and in my experience with the cameras I have used, the 1D3 is all over the D3 for fast focusing. I did have a camera with the sub mirror fix which got sent back, both before and afterwards it was better focusing than the D3 was, not just in accuracy but initial lock on is far faster and definitely showed when I used both cameras photographing puffins in flight during the summer.

My camera is certainly as good at tracking as a MkIIn, and definitley quicker at initial focus. In my opinion a lot of people are having problems using the MkIII because they don't understand how to set it up. When mine came it wasn't that wonderful for birds in flight because I hadn't set it up properly, it has the most complicated and adjustable AF system of any camera, and that has been its undoing.

I think the images off the D3 have a bit more contrast, although that could be due to the glass, but both produce images of very similar quality with the NEFs coming off the D3 being slightly more polished than the CR2s of the Canons.