Hands on 5D3 vs 1DX Comparison

Crewd

I got to spend some time with these two cameras today as I'm working on deciding which to go with for the foreseeable future and I thought someone might be interested in my thoughts.

Basically I wanted a short list of what that extra few thousand would be getting me. Here it is based not on spec sheets that we have all seen -- but actual work with the the pre-production model of the 1DX.

• Awesomely faster & better focusing.
• Damn near bulletproof feeling body casing. This is a solid camera.
• Better low light (low noise at high ISO) (by a bit).

The only clarification I'd like to make is on the low light performance. I had one Canon guy tell me that we'd be getting 2 stops more low noise performance while maintaining professional level quality over the 5D3. My testing of that showed otherwise however. With the same lens, settings, etc on both cameras 100% crops showed that the 1DX could in fact push it farther than the 5D3 but not by 2 stops. I found through experimentation that it was actually closer to half a stop... Maaaybe 1 stop better. Meaning I would arrive at the same noise level output on both cameras at about that difference.

However, I did notice a marked improvement on the clarity in low light on the 1DX. One of my tests was on a womans hair and there was no question that the 1DX maintained the texture better.

So if I had to break it down, I'd say we're getting $1500's worth of extra low light performance and the rest is more than paid for by the plethora of other improvements.

I'm still on the fence if it's right for me... but it really comes down to what you'll be using it for as usual.

If anyone has any questions ask away.

-Patrick

ziggy53

I am primarily interested in the low-light AF capability oi the 1D X versus the 5D MKIII. Since the 1D X has much more processing power and a newer metering module.

Is there much AF slowdown in low light?
How is low light AF accuracy?

jmphotocraft

Awesomely faster & better focusing than the 5D3?

Crewd

ziggy53 wrote: »

I am primarily interested in the low-light AF capability oi the 1D X versus the 5D MKIII. Since the 1D X has much more processing power and a newer metering module.

Is there much AF slowdown in low light?
How is low light AF accuracy?

Ah, I'm glad you brought that up. This was another one of the talking points that the Canon guys listed when asked directly for the real life ways that the 1DX is better than the 5D3.

However.... and let me preface this by saying a big ole YMMV as my tests didnt really look at this specifically -- I was really underwhelmed by the 1DX low light focusing. The 5D3 may have actually beaten it to the punch a couple times on the 70-200 2.8L IS II I was using for the tests. But please dont put too much stock in that. I would want more testing time to have a clear opinion. Also, this was only under low light conditions -- see below for normal. Also, when the 1DX "found what it was looking for" it locked on tack sharp and probably faster than the 5D3... But it just seemed as though it wasnt able to lock on much faster than the 5D3 -- if any. *** YMMV ***

jmphotocraft wrote: »

Awesomely faster & better focusing than the 5D3?

Yes, the 1DX won out by a fair margin (and that surprised me because the 5D3's new focusing rocks). I was especially impressed by it's AI Servo focusing modes performance. (I'm not sure if it's called that on the 1DX, but that's what I know it as)

Hope that helps.

jhefti

I'm curious as to the overall IQ between the cameras under good to moderate light conditions (say ISO 100 through ISO 3200). I currently shoot pro sports with two 1D4 bodies, but occasionally still use my 5D2 and find that the latter has better IQ overall in this ISO range. At my kids high school basketball games, where I need to shoot at ISO 6400 minimum, the IQ difference between the 5D2 and the 1D4 is less clear (pun intended).

Basically, I rarely need these extremes of ISO. (I have pushed my 1D4 and 5D2 to 12,400, but that's it.) I am willing to give up a little (but not a lot) on the AF speed in exchange for IQ. The 5D2 AF system is really primitive, but I still find it workable in predictable games like baseball; less so for soccer.

Your thoughts on the overall IQ would be greatly appreciated!

Crewd

jhefti wrote: »

I'm curious as to the overall IQ between the cameras under good to moderate light conditions (say ISO 100 through ISO 3200). I currently shoot pro sports with two 1D4 bodies, but occasionally still use my 5D2 and find that the latter has better IQ overall in this ISO range. At my kids high school basketball games, where I need to shoot at ISO 6400 minimum, the IQ difference between the 5D2 and the 1D4 is less clear (pun intended).

Basically, I rarely need these extremes of ISO. (I have pushed my 1D4 and 5D2 to 12,400, but that's it.) I am willing to give up a little (but not a lot) on the AF speed in exchange for IQ. The 5D2 AF system is really primitive, but I still find it workable in predictable games like baseball; less so for soccer.

Your thoughts on the overall IQ would be greatly appreciated!

While I was underwhelmed by the difference in low light performance of the two there was absolutely no denying a fair amount of IQ improvement over the 5D3, and double that for low light IQ. There was a sharpness improvement to the low light 1DX images that was stark when compared to the 5D3 side by side. I mean really noticeable. In normal light shots it was much less noticeable but still there.

I must keep saying though that I had only about a half hour or so with both cameras and my subjects available for testing were not varied enough for anything I say to be taken as conclusive. I used womens hair and textured leather hand bags for IQ and sharpness comparisons in normal and low light and black shag carpet in dark shadow for low light ISO noise testing and low light focusing tests. With anything higher contrast the focusing performance was difficult to differentiate under the conditions I had available.

Did I answer your questions somewhere in there?

Quincy T

This is one of those pieces of kit that I enjoy reading about, and hear other's discussing amongst themselves, but come into every conversation with the realization that it is incredibly unlikely that I will ever own one in the next decade or more. And that is just fine.

jhefti

Crewd wrote: »

While I was underwhelmed by the difference in low light performance of the two there was absolutely no denying a fair amount of IQ improvement over the 5D3, and double that for low light IQ. There was a sharpness improvement to the low light 1DX images that was stark when compared to the 5D3 side by side. I mean really noticeable. In normal light shots it was much less noticeable but still there.

I must keep saying though that I had only about a half hour or so with both cameras and my subjects available for testing were not varied enough for anything I say to be taken as conclusive. I used womens hair and textured leather hand bags for IQ and sharpness comparisons in normal and low light and black shag carpet in dark shadow for low light ISO noise testing and low light focusing tests. With anything higher contrast the focusing performance was difficult to differentiate under the conditions I had available.

Did I answer your questions somewhere in there?

Many thanks--yes, you did answer my questions, and with the appropriate caveats rather than unconditional statements.

I'm not surprised that the difference in IQ was small under good lighting--it usually is.

I guess I'll just need to go to BorrowLenses and take both out for an extended shoot. I am rarely an early adopter of technologies; preferring instead to let others report in with their findings, and then buy if/when it makes sense. So often with cameras, the specs and the actual performance are not too strongly correlated.

Thanks for posting this!

XTremePhotography

The most significant difference between 1dx and 5d3 (I have both of these cameras) is the size of the viewfinder. The 1dx's viewfinder is significantly larger than the 5d3.

The 2nd thing that I noticed difference is that 1dx allows you to map the AF point to the AE spot meter point, which can come in handy "sometimes"

Eric

Quincy T

XTremePhotography wrote: »

The most significant difference between 1dx and 5d3 (I have both of these cameras) is the size of the viewfinder. The 1dx's viewfinder is significantly larger than the 5d3.

The 2nd thing that I noticed difference is that 1dx allows you to map the AF point to the AE spot meter point, which can come in handy "sometimes"

Eric

Yes, I'd have to agree that the most significant difference between the two is the size of the viewfinder. Spot on evaluation.

Matthew Saville

Crewd wrote: »

While I was underwhelmed by the difference in low light performance of the two there was absolutely no denying a fair amount of IQ improvement over the 5D3, and double that for low light IQ. There was a sharpness improvement to the low light 1DX images that was stark when compared to the 5D3 side by side. I mean really noticeable. In normal light shots it was much less noticeable but still there.

From other samples I've seen, there's also a huge difference in shadows / dynamic range, even at ISO 100. I'd love to see additional testing of real-world extreme dynamic range. White clothing in full sunlight and dark clothing / hair in deep shade, see if you can squeeze that into a single exposure without the 5D mk3 shadows turning green.

Quincy T wrote: »

Yes, I'd have to agree that the most significant difference between the two is the size of the viewfinder. Spot on evaluation.

I certainly hope that is not a deciding factor unless you have a very big use for such a spec. A $30 magnifier + eyecup makes my Nikon D700 viewfinder look as giant and gorgeous as even my old film FM3!

=Matt=

Quincy T

Matthew Saville wrote: »

From other samples I've seen, there's also a huge difference in shadows / dynamic range, even at ISO 100. I'd love to see additional testing of real-world extreme dynamic range. White clothing in full sunlight and dark clothing / hair in deep shade, see if you can squeeze that into a single exposure without the 5D mk3 shadows turning green.



I certainly hope that is not a deciding factor unless you have a very big use for such a spec. A $30 magnifier + eyecup makes my Nikon D700 viewfinder look as giant and gorgeous as even my old film FM3!

=Matt=

I was hoping the hefty load of sarcasm with my comment would be more noticeable. Anyone who thinks the most significant difference between the 5D3 and 1DX is viewfinder size could use a little smart-assery.

chrisdg

I recently bought the 5D3 and was considering getting a second as my backup camera...however I have not been thrilled with it's ability to grab focus during concerts - even when I'm 5 feet from the musician in fairly decent club lighting. Maybe the 1DX is what I need. I'll have to rent one and check it out.


EDIT - I'll post this issue outside of this thread, don't want to hi-jack it. I need a second camera, so am hoping that the 1DX will excel in this particular area.

ziggy53

chrisdg wrote: »

I recently bought the 5D3 and was considering getting a second as my backup camera...however I have not been thrilled with it's ability to grab focus during concerts - even when I'm 5 feet from the musician in fairly decent club lighting. Maybe the 1DX is what I need. I'll have to rent one and check it out.

What lens were you using? What focus technique?