Options

Couple 3200 iso shots with the 1D MK3

jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
edited December 23, 2009 in Cameras
Good Evening Folks,
Happy Holidays to everyone :D I shot a couple of test pictures earlier using my Tamron 24-135 and 17-50 2.8 on my newly acquired (used) 1D MK3, at 3200 iso. The samples might be small, but the actual sizes are easily suitable for 12'' x 16'' prints. This camera is amazing. I couldn't believe the difference in af speed, high iso usability and low light af lock on, compared to my 40D. I bought the camera locally from a member of FM, who switched to the "dark side". Without a doubt, this is the best sub $2000 (camera) purchase I have made to date. Ziggy, as usual, you we're right about this camera. Thank you :thumb
Have a good evening :D
Jim...

Comments

  • Options
    jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
    edited December 22, 2009
    #2...
  • Options
    StevenSzaboStevenSzabo Registered Users Posts: 93 Big grins
    edited December 22, 2009
    either tamron makes their boxes grainy or that first image really isn't a good example of any sort of ISO capabilities of the camera...or I guess maybe it's a great test of the ISO capabilities of a 1D3

    For under $2000 it's a good purchase sure, but even the D300 does better than that at 3200 ISO.
  • Options
    jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
    edited December 22, 2009
    StevenSzabo wrote:
    either tamron makes their boxes grainy or that first image really isn't a good example of any sort of ISO capabilities of the camera...or I guess maybe it's a great test of the ISO capabilities of a 1D3

    For under $2000 it's a good purchase sure, but even the D300 does better than that at 3200 ISO.
    Hey Steve,
    Thanks for your response thumb.gif The first pic was actually shot under a 40w bulb, so there is some film like grain, but not the chroma noise that is associated with other dslrs at this iso setting. Same with pic #2. Shot under a 40W bulb, but still looks good at 100% on my monitor. For the price I paid, the camera will pay for itself with my next 3 shoots mwink.gif
    Thanks again and Happy Holidays to you and your family :D
    Jim...
  • Options
    StevenSzaboStevenSzabo Registered Users Posts: 93 Big grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    I guess I'm just spoiled...I'm used to 12'800 ISO looking like this

    740366725_HDWTT-L-1.jpg
  • Options
    Longshooter2010Longshooter2010 Registered Users Posts: 2 Beginner grinner
    edited December 23, 2009
    Nice shot, but for an 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 picture, does it matter ? I shoot Nikon and Canon, and see very little difference up to 3200 between systems when I print. Never had the need for anything larger. Looks like a slight difference in lighting as well, but my eyes may be deceiving :>)
    Don
  • Options
    StevenSzaboStevenSzabo Registered Users Posts: 93 Big grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    my most common print size is a 16 X 24, but mostly because I deliberately over charge for 4 X 6's and 8X10's because they're a pain in the ass to do on a 9900...lol

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not a real canon hater, and the printing capabilities from a 5dmkII in decent lighting are definitely a reality, even over my D3s I would say it's much easier to make a large print from the MkII. But as soon as the lights dim the nikon system starts to pull ahead.
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,911 moderator
    edited December 23, 2009
    StevenSzabo wrote:
    I guess I'm just spoiled...I'm used to 12'800 ISO looking like this

    Awfully rude.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,911 moderator
    edited December 23, 2009
    Congratulations on the new camera Jim. clap.gif
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Awfully rude.
    Good Evening Ziggy,
    Everybody is entitled to their opinion :D My 40D made me such a fortune on construction progress photography that I decided to upgrade to the 1D MK3, and another vehicle, among other items. I never had the need for iso 3200 in a 12' x 12' room when I had my tripod mwink.gif However, with wedding photography, it's a different ball game. This camera will suit my needs, believe me. I didn't want a 1DS MK3 at this time, but I'll wait until the 1DS MK4 is released in the upcoming months. Thank you.
    Happy Holidays to you and your family :D
    Jim...
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,911 moderator
    edited December 23, 2009
    Longshooter2010 wrote:
    Nice shot, but for an 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 picture, does it matter ? I shoot Nikon and Canon, and see very little difference up to 3200 between systems when I print. Never had the need for anything larger. Looks like a slight difference in lighting as well, but my eyes may be deceiving :>)
    Don

    Don, welcome to the Digital Grin. clap.gif
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Congratulations on the new camera Jim. clap.gif
    Thanks Ziggy thumb.gif
    Happy Holidays :D
    Jim...
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,911 moderator
    edited December 23, 2009
    jgoetz4 wrote:
    ... Everybody is entitled to their opinion ...

    I don't mind opinion, but there's a better way to say things. Thanks for being a sport about it.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    Longshooter2010Longshooter2010 Registered Users Posts: 2 Beginner grinner
    edited December 23, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Don, welcome to the Digital Grin. clap.gif
    Thank you. I look forward to expanding my photo capabilities here.
    Don
  • Options
    StevenSzaboStevenSzabo Registered Users Posts: 93 Big grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    ziggy53 wrote:
    I don't mind opinion, but there's a better way to say things. Thanks for being a sport about it.

    Lol, I'm sorry, I forgot that this is the "nice" forum where we're supposed to congratulate people on their achievements regardless...I just figured when a guy goes out of his way to post 3200 ISO shots they should be worth showing off, and there's plenty of ways to make 3200 ISO shots from this camera look good...he just chose an example that doesn't...I will refrain from pointing out ISO noise from now on and I sincerely apologize for my rudeness...
  • Options
    jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    StevenSzabo wrote:
    Lol, I'm sorry, I forgot that this is the "nice" forum where we're supposed to congratulate people on their achievements regardless...I just figured when a guy goes out of his way to post 3200 ISO shots they should be worth showing off, and there's plenty of ways to make 3200 ISO shots from this camera look good...he just chose an example that doesn't...I will refrain from pointing out ISO noise from now on and I sincerely apologize for my rudeness...
    Good Morning Steve,
    I guess a re-edit was needed. Still, for just having a 40w bulb as your only light source, it's not bad at all.
    Happy Holidays to you and your family :D
    Jim...
  • Options
    StevenSzaboStevenSzabo Registered Users Posts: 93 Big grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    see...much better ;)
  • Options
    jgoetz4jgoetz4 Registered Users Posts: 1,267 Major grins
    edited December 23, 2009
    StevenSzabo wrote:
    see...much better ;)
    Good Evening Steven,
    Thank you.
    Happy Holidays to you and your family :D
    Jim...
Sign In or Register to comment.