Should I get the Nikon D3s or the Canon 1D Mark IV?

[inTempus]

Yeah, I'm certainly not an expert sports photographer and I've shot exactly two basketball games in my life. I shot one immediately after getting my 1D4. It was indoor at night, lighting was horrific, fast action, and all I had was my trusty 1D4 and 70-200 that hasn't been calibrated by Canon.

Here are a few shots from that night.

I found that even in my novice hands the 1D4 made easy work of the action. I simply put the AF point I wanted on the subject, set the camera to auto ISO and Tv mode so I could select my shutter speed and poof, instant pictures that were in focus.

I also had the chance to shoot the Chicago polar bears. This time I was outside (bitter cold - 18 degrees for 2 hours) and there was ample light. Again, outstanding performance even though I was using gloves the size of Texas trying to keep my hands warm... the buttons worked flawlessly despite my gloved handicap and the camera rocked the event with in focus shots and amazing clarity.

Rob can tell me how bad the camera sucks all he likes, but I know from first hand experience this camera works. Hell, even under the same poor lighting and fast action Rob was talking about having problems with, I seemed to do just fine. Perhaps I should be doing his reviews for him.

 

[schumionbike]

We should have Intempus and Derrel have a shootout, whoever win get the prize

 

[Montana]

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV - impressions - Ron Scheffler

Seem to be a fairly unbias review as he's a Canon shooter and doesn't seem all that well verse with Nikon. Take it as you will. His conclusion kind of support both sides which is kind of funny but whatever. I figure you guys would talk about the girl or something but here we're arguing about AF system. Not even ISO sensitivity but the AF system??? I don't remember arguing about that before the 1DMark IV show up. It was always about noise before.

Thanks for posting this one, I had not yet seen it. I have the 600 f/4 IS and it is the only lens I have yet to test extensively with. I know there were some issues with people that updated to the new firmware and the long lenses, but it seems things are sorted out. And people that had cameras shipped with the new firmware weren't experiencing the issues. I wonder if he had the same issue? Mine shipped with the new firmware. I will finally be off of this oil rig tomorrow and hope to get to try the 600f/4 out some more. Sure hope everything is good. I would be sick to my stomach if my camera cannot track after dropping 5000 dollars on it.

 

[inTempus]

From a discussion on SportShooter.com:

Farmington | UT | USA | Posted: 6:13 PM on 12.26.09 -

>> Our newspaper is currently testing out a Mark IV. We wanted to put it through some real world testing, shooting in deep, dark high school gyms and candle light vigils etc. Places where it is hard to focus and the light is not that great, but places that we have to take photos in almost every day at a newspaper. Our management insisted that we perform real world testing before we committed to any purchases of new equipment. Frankly we had been somewhat disappointed with the performance of most of our Mark III's .

So far we have rotated the test camera through most of our staff giving each a chance to shoot with it at various events. We are currently testing out the video capabilities of the camera this weekend before we send it back to Canon.

The initial results so far have been outstanding. The autofocus is getting rave reviews from staffers that have used the camera. And the low light capabilities have been remarkable. One of our photographers used it to photograph a high school wrestling meet. He got an amazing shot of one of the wrestlers getting his elbow dislocated. He said that we would have never gotten the shot with his Mark III because of the low light capabilities of the Mark IV he was able to shoot at 1/640 rather than the normal 1/250 we normally use in this gym. He was able to freeze the action and the low noise and higher quality of the image made the moment even clearer.

Here are a couple of links to this photo which is in a photo gallery on our newspapers website and other photo galleries we have done with the Mark IV.

Wrestling photos: most of the images in this gallery are from the Mark IV. image #25 is the one I referred to above: http://www.deseretnews.com/photo/gallery/hs/3253/High-school-wrestling-View...

Also go to this link and click on the High school basketball: Bingham vs. Brighton game it has 13 photos most of which were taken with the Mark IV at ISO's ranging from 1600 to 12,800. Deseret News | Photos/

And finally for an interesting comparison go to this gallery of images at a candle light vigil for a missing women Susan Powell. The images taken by our staff photographer Scott Winterton in Utah were taken with the Mark IV. The other images in the gallery where taken by another photographer up in Washington, state with different cameras. Here is the link: Husband of missing West Valley woman has left Utah | Deseret News

When I get a chance I plan to post more information, images and links to video from our test of the Mark IV on my blog http://augustmiller.blogspot.com/ once the cameras are officially at dealers for sale.

 

[inTempus]

I was waiting for this guy to chime in over on the Canon forums. He's a Nikon guy historically (since the 1D3 problems) who tried the 1D3 no less than 3 times and returned all 3.

He ordered a 1D4 and promised to post his findings once he had a chance to review the new camera.

I hated the MKIII, returned several.

I spent this weekend with my MKIV. Complain, squawk, cry, all you all want. Trust RG, pixel peep, etc, etc, ect ...whatever. This camera rocks. 2000+ shots at wide aperture, ISO 6400+, fast AF tracking..... perfect.

Read this: MKIV focus training

Unless you own an MKIV, and have read the link above, posting here with concerns, suggestions or comments might seem a bit "uneducated"

I have been shooting for 30 years....I read that document and learned a lot.

Read it. Apply it....and post some pictures.

Tracking a gymnast on Vault is impossible. I have tried for 8 years with various gear....I have pre-focused on certain spots on the vault for years just to get a crack at it . Tracking would never cut cut it.

I did several full tracking sequences and this is the last of a four sequential shot series tracking a Vault runner ( all four perfectly focused) ....straight form the camera and no PP except for a DPP run.

I'll post more,but from what I see....learn a little and shoot as a professional and this camera will kick the crap out of anything Nikon.

Personally? I could sell this camera and go to Nikon tomorrow. Economically, it is fairly easy to digest. I have owned Nikon for along time......but after today? No way....this is excellent. YMMV,

Link with sample pic: Canon Digital Photography Forums - View Single Post - Official: Canon 1D Mk IV

Also, download the AF users guide he links to in his post. That's an amazing resource, lots of very useful info. Perhaps Rob should have read it before heading out to the field with the 1D4.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Shooting sports ain't easy, but honestly either camera will work, and these are the two premier cameras for shooting action in the world. If you have canon gear, get the canon, if you have nikon gear, get the nikon. if you have neither, rent them both. Than base a decision of of that.

Not rocket science, and they'll both be able to do exactly what you want.


I dunno, i've gotten some pretty nice action pics on my trusty old D70s, and that camera has never been regarded as fast in any area by anyone.

Yeah that D70 is a real piece of sh*t..can't shoot a picture worth a damn, and if I was able to get lucky with shots like this, you could get lucky more often with either one, D3 or 1D.

 

[inTempus]

Another interesting observation about the RG article.

His comments about the 1D4 are pretty tersely worded. He obviously is using very colorful metaphors and phrases when describing the issues he's seeing with the 1D4. He's not simply reporting the problems he's seen, he's condemning the camera with sharp wording...

RG talking about the 1D4:
"there's no way to trust it"

"the AF system verged on total collapse"

"The EOS-1D Mark IV's Jekyll and Hyde autofocus performance at soccer has been so wacky that it's difficult to make a comparison to the D3S"

"and the results were as described: completely terrible."

However, when the D3S shows similar failings, he's dismissive about the problems and paints the failures in an almost positive light. No comments about "Jekyll and Hyde" behavior, not comments about not being able to trust the D3S... just a few rosy "Oops! It misses in bright light and occasionally does something it shouldn't that we can't explain, but there's nothing to see here!" comments.

RG talking about the D3S:
"it misses a few when it ought not to,..."

"...will at times front focus slightly in bright light."

"flubbing only a few frames in extended sequences"

"though there's also room for improvement"

"though it's not without its quirks and, as mentioned, there may well be something not quite right about how it tracks with a long lens in bright light"

I'm sorry, but that's clearly biased reporting and honestly shows RG to be little more than a shill for Nikon.

When actual professional photographers start reporting problems with their bodies (assuming they ever do), then we might have something to discuss. As it stands right now, all we have are the words of a single reviewer on the Nikon payroll that in all likelihood doesn't know how to use the 1D4 properly, or has a bias against the 1D4 as evidenced by his rather telling choice of words. We also have many reports from actual working sports photographers who are saying the 1D4 is nothing short of amazing.

 

[schumionbike]

People are bias, that's nothing new, that's why you read more than one reviews. To be fair though, RG did have a very nice review of 1D Mark II. By the way, the link I posted to Ron Scheffler's page seemed to mention some of the quirk he had with the 1DIV without all the colorful language use by RG. What do you think?

At the end of the day, I think both the D3s and 1DIV will net a very respectful amount of keepers and any different between the two will probably come down to the users.

 

[inTempus]

There was an issue with the 1D4 that was addressed in firmware 1.0.6. I don't believe Schefflers article was updated post 1.0.6. I'll have to look again. However, the issue was resolved to the satisfaction of those 1D4 users posting on the internet that reported the issue.

The D3 (and likely the D3S) has a pretty well known problem with focusing in very dark situations, to the point many event photographers switch to manual mode so they can focus (this is discussed ad nauseum on the Nikon forums, on DPReview and elsewhere on the net). RG doesn't mention this failing in any of his reviews nor in his most recent comments. I find that highly suspect.

Couple this failure to focus in darkness with its inability to focus in bright light reliably and you would think RG would have something to say about it... but he doesn't. Well, he does mention the problems with bright light but quite dismissively as if it's not really a problem at all.

 

[gsgary]

Another interesting observation about the RG article.

His comments about the 1D4 are pretty tersely worded. He obviously is using very colorful metaphors and phrases when describing the issues he's seeing with the 1D4. He's not simply reporting the problems he's seen, he's condemning the camera with sharp wording...

RG talking about the 1D4:
"there's no way to trust it"

"the AF system verged on total collapse"

"The EOS-1D Mark IV's Jekyll and Hyde autofocus performance at soccer has been so wacky that it's difficult to make a comparison to the D3S"

"and the results were as described: completely terrible."

However, when the D3S shows similar failings, he's dismissive about the problems and paints the failures in an almost positive light. No comments about "Jekyll and Hyde" behavior, not comments about not being able to trust the D3S... just a few rosy "Oops! It misses in bright light and occasionally does something it shouldn't that we can't explain, but there's nothing to see here!" comments.

RG talking about the D3S:
"it misses a few when it ought not to,..."

"...will at times front focus slightly in bright light."

"flubbing only a few frames in extended sequences"

"though there's also room for improvement"

"though it's not without its quirks and, as mentioned, there may well be something not quite right about how it tracks with a long lens in bright light"

I'm sorry, but that's clearly biased reporting and honestly shows RG to be little more than a shill for Nikon.

When actual professional photographers start reporting problems with their bodies (assuming they ever do), then we might have something to discuss. As it stands right now, all we have are the words of a single reviewer on the Nikon payroll that in all likelihood doesn't know how to use the 1D4 properly, or has a bias against the 1D4 as evidenced by his rather telling choice of words. We also have many reports from actual working sports photographers who are saying the 1D4 is nothing short of amazing.

The bloke is a prick read one of articles once never again

 

[gsgary]

There was an issue with the 1D4 that was addressed in firmware 1.0.6. I don't believe Schefflers article was updated post 1.0.6. I'll have to look again. However, the issue was resolved to the satisfaction of those 1D4 users posting on the internet that reported the issue.

The D3 (and likely the D3S) has a pretty well known problem with focusing in very dark situations, to the point many event photographers switch to manual mode so they can focus (this is discussed ad nauseum on the Nikon forums, on DPReview and elsewhere on the net). RG doesn't mention this failing in any of his reviews nor in his most recent comments. I find that highly suspect.

Couple this failure to focus in darkness with its inability to focus in bright light reliably and you would think RG would have something to say about it... but he doesn't. Well, he does mention the problems with bright light but quite dismissively as if it's not really a problem at all.

I don't believe that Nikon are perfect

 

[cfusionpm]

Another interesting observation about the RG article.

His comments about the 1D4 are pretty tersely worded. He obviously is using very colorful metaphors and phrases when describing the issues he's seeing with the 1D4. He's not simply reporting the problems he's seen, he's condemning the camera with sharp wording...

RG talking about the 1D4:
"there's no way to trust it"

"the AF system verged on total collapse"

"The EOS-1D Mark IV's Jekyll and Hyde autofocus performance at soccer has been so wacky that it's difficult to make a comparison to the D3S"

"and the results were as described: completely terrible."

However, when the D3S shows similar failings, he's dismissive about the problems and paints the failures in an almost positive light. No comments about "Jekyll and Hyde" behavior, not comments about not being able to trust the D3S... just a few rosy "Oops! It misses in bright light and occasionally does something it shouldn't that we can't explain, but there's nothing to see here!" comments.

RG talking about the D3S:
"it misses a few when it ought not to,..."

"...will at times front focus slightly in bright light."

"flubbing only a few frames in extended sequences"

"though there's also room for improvement"

"though it's not without its quirks and, as mentioned, there may well be something not quite right about how it tracks with a long lens in bright light"

I'm sorry, but that's clearly biased reporting and honestly shows RG to be little more than a shill for Nikon.

When actual professional photographers start reporting problems with their bodies (assuming they ever do), then we might have something to discuss. As it stands right now, all we have are the words of a single reviewer on the Nikon payroll that in all likelihood doesn't know how to use the 1D4 properly, or has a bias against the 1D4 as evidenced by his rather telling choice of words. We also have many reports from actual working sports photographers who are saying the 1D4 is nothing short of amazing.

So he's like the Rush Limbaugh of photography, eh?

 

[Montana]

nice shots SwitchFX!

I have some shots from a 5DII in servo. I was told this camera cannot shoot anything but portraiture and still life. LOL Mine works like a champ.

 

[inTempus]

How did you get your dog to hold that pose Montana?

 

[Montana]

It was 24° below zero. He froze like that. You shoulda seen it when I took a leak outside.


And you can call me Derrick, Tim.