Top of the line old vs. middle of the road new

[dcmoody23]

What's better? While looking around at cameras today I got curious and really would like to know.. Like I could get a used Canon 1D mark III for $2100, or a new 5D for what, like $2500?, or a 7D for $1700..
Just wondering what would be the best to have, assuming that the used was well taken care of.

 

[o hey tyler]

The 7D is the only model in that lineup that has color aware metering. It's currently the top crop frame body on the market. The 1D will probably still have a better AF system, but if you're shooting mostly landscapes that shouldn't matter too much.

I've considered jumping from using a T1i to a 5D1 a number of times, but I haven't been able to justify it yet. When I start shooting more weddings, I'll probably take the plunge.

 

[BuS_RiDeR]

1D Would be my choice, as long as its in good working order...

 

[Big Mike]

I think it depends on your usage...as those are three different cameras.

For example, the 5D II is probably the best at high ISO and overall image quality. But the other two have better AF and a faster frame rate, making them better for sports/action. I seem to recall that the early 1D mk III has AF problem, so you'd want to make sure that was taken care of.

The 1D mk III is a 1 series body...top of the line professional quality. If you want/need something that is built like a tank, then this is probably it.

If you want video and/or built-in wireless flash master, then the 7D is the one.

 

[Derrel]

Yeah, depends on the intended use. But one thing I have found: the flagship-level bodies have much faster response time and latency time than the lower-level bodies. The 1D series Canon bodies are faster in operation; the 5D is actually pretty slow by comparison. You'll see this most in action work. With a slow body like a 5D, you have to press the shutter release button as the field goal kicker's leg comes to the back of the swing...with a faster, professional-level body, the needed allowance for the mirror to swing up is much,much shorter. These types of things are measured in milliseconds, but the 5D is somewhere around twice as slow I would say, as the 1D III is in terms of shutter lag, and in how fast the mirror comes back down and brings back the viewing image. PLus, if you add in the frame rate differences, which is another matter entirely, then the overall speed advantage of the pro-level bodies really begins to be compounded. People who have not owned or extensively used a pro-level body will sometimes tend to dismiss these types of issues, but they are very real in actual photography on a day-by-day-by-day type basis.

You might find that you "shoot better" with what is by specifications, a "lesser" camera in terms of megapixel count, but a much,much higher level of camera-building and engineering underlying it. There is a reason the flagship camera bodies cost more than the mid-level bodies, and much of it has to do with the absolute speed and responsiveness of the mechanics, as well as viewfinder system and pentaprism quality and clarity.

 

[dcmoody23]

Well I'm really getting into landscape/nature stuff, and when I originally purchased my camera I was all about sports. IMO you can tell when a picture was taken with a 5D Mark II - I don't know why, but I just absolutely love the look of nature stuff that the 5D is able to produce. I'm quite aways from a body upgrade myself, but I was pretty curious about the whole thing.