Dan,have you used a 1D MkIII yet? I have been trying to decide between a 50D and a used MkIII. I have a MKIII spotted with low clicks [3500] for $2300 and it's mint+ It has had the shutter box update,so it's good to go. What do you hear about them? Thanks.

Lucky bugger. I know which one I'd pick, but I'll let Dan answer your question.

I appreciate anyone's advise/opinions Steve. I just wonder about the 1.3X sensor-is it intended to be the best of both worlds? You would still have some crop for the long glass,and maybe reduced noise? Also,I want better focusing.

MM, no I have not used a Mark III. I've held a few in my hands and shot a couple of photos but I don't think thats using one.

I can speak a bit about the sports side of the camera and honestly they probably ask the most out of a focus system which of course is the big question with this camera. There are many that switched brands over this camera, and many that have had good luck with it.

I don't remember which color dot Canon is with current bodies, I believe it is yellow dot. That means the camera is the most up to date with the shutter box fix. I've heard that fixed the problem and a few shooters I completely respect have indicated it made the camera slightly worse.

Canon put out an article a few months back that chronicled their thinking and the process they used to correct problems with the camera. A search should find that info rather easy.

Rob Galbraith is the site you want to read to get everything there is to know about the camera. He identified the focus issues initially and through the last sub-mirror fix.

So all that comes down to what? I've been watching prices very close to see if something comes down to the prices you have found. At that price I would contemplate pulling the trigger very fast on a Mark III.

A couple of things to consider;

1. Call Canon with a serial number and see what the latest firmware and status of the sub-mirror is. I know you said it has been done, but it would not hurt to check.

2. Canon has said that the sub-mirror fix is an open ticket, meaning it doesn't matter how old or who owns it they will do the sub-mirror fix for free.

3. Most likely the new Mark IV or whatever it will be called will be out in the spring. Canon has a history of 18 month product cycles, we are approaching that fast.

Nikon has kicked their a** and I would think Canon wants back in the game. Prices have been falling steadily since the introduction of the D3. I look for that to continue. I have seen a number of them in the $2700 to $3200 range for a camera that retailed at $4600 new. Your price for a body with low actuations would be tough to pass up.

The focus issue on this camera has been primarily with objects that are moving toward the camera, especially in hot conditions. That honestly is the toughest test for any camera. I would venture to guess your use of the camera would not put it in that situation all that often.

The focus on the 1 series cameras, even the Mark III really does not compare to the xxD cameras. 45 point focus system that really is considerably better than the xxD camera systems and that includes the 50D.

Some careful checking on what has been done and the individual you are buying from would go a long way toward setting your mind at ease. Do some reading on the history of the camera and it will give you an idea on what you will have in your hands. There has been a ton written on this camera, both good and bad. Only you can decide if things have been fixed to your satisfaction. But I will say it again, at that price I would be VERY inclined to have one in my camera bag.

Good luck with the decision, if you want any more info feel free to e-mail as well.

You responded as I was typing MM. I love the 1.3 crop. My 70-200, 17-40 I like considerably better on that camera. The wide-end of those lenses get much closer to the full frame lengths I shot for many years.

As a for instance the 70-200 went from a great lens to a fantastic basketball lens on the 1.3 crop. So much better coverage on the near court shooting. The 1.6 is nice for field work but I don't mind losing a bit of reach on the long end for some better coverage on the wide end.

It really comes down to how you use your camera. I use both so I kind of get the best of both worlds. I don't buy any EF-S lenses so that I can use every lens on either crop body. I would not hesitate to own only 1.3 crop cameras, they work very well for my style of shooting.

I would,but it always says "private messages disabled" even though I have it set different in my preferences.

I agree with Dan on this one, MM, though I tend to think you'll be doing very little shooting of the type that has identified the autofocus weakness of the Mk3.

I've shot a lot with the 1.3 crop sensor on the Mk2 and Mk2n, wildlife/nature and low-light performance work, not sports, and like Dan I love the results. I did a lot of work with the 17-40 on those bodies, some work with the 100-400 and probably the most work with the 400 f2.8L Mk2 (nonIS) and 600 f4L IS, both with and without both Canon TCs. Uniformly great performance and IQ from all those lenses on those bodies, and that 400 with the 1.4 TC was a veritable machine when it came to rapid fire focus acquisition and burst rate.

For $2,300 for a Mk3, as long as you are satisfied it is a credible buyer who is truthful about the camera/transaction, I would whip out my credit card so fast the friction between the plastic card and leather wallet would melt the plastic. I envy you, my friend. A Mk3 with the 300 f2.8L IS and the 1.4 or 2x TC will be a deadly weapon in a huge variety of situations.

I've seen prints displayed to 30x40 shot with the Mk3. Stunning.

dbleitch at aol dot com

Also, MM, for the perspectives of a famous bird/nature photographer who has used the Mk3 extensively since it came out, including a ton of bird-in-flight photography, check out what Arthur Morris has experienced. You should be able to find his site easily.

My Mark II's are a couple of generations old right now, but I would have a tough time giving them up for anything. They're still what I use primarily for all my sports photography (although I'll be extensively testing the 50D over the next couple of weeks of basketball) and all my studio work. The 17-40L is an excellent portrait lens with the 1.3. Good luck on your choice.

Not to be negative but a good friend of mine uses a Mark III and he does alot of wildlife/BIF type of stuff and with the AI servo issues the camera has presented him, he is ready to toss this thing.

Steve, you'll meet this friend here in two weeks, ask him yourself what he thinks about this camera's AI servo focusing. Then ask him about what happened when he shot raptors with me recently.

If you don't have high expectations of getting BIF type of images, I'd say its a great deal! The sensor, color depth, dynamic range and low light ISO performance is all top notch!

He should have kept that Mark IIN he had Mike

Well,after some careful thought [and my wife reminding me we need tires on 2 vehicles] I've decided to try a 50D.
I was a little suspicious of the 50 at first,but after examining some tests I hadn't seen before between it and the 40D,it looks pretty good.
My main concern was noise-and the RAW noise is the most accurate method of measuring the noise the sensor produces,as no noise reduction of any kind is being introduced into the image when shot in RAW. Pretty much all the tests I have seen show the 50D/40D about equal in RAW noise up to ISO 1600. From 100-800 they are identical. After thinking about how Canon put 15mp on an aps-c sensor,and didn't increase the noise from iso 100 to iso 800-in RAW-with no noise reduction-I found myself more impressed with what they had accomplished with the gapless micro lenses.
When shooting outdoors I usually shoot iso 400 or under and iso 100 if at all possible. So the fact that I have 15 million pixels to crop from-with the same noise level as a 40D from 100-800 iso-is very appealing.
When shooting indoors @ iso 3200,[on aps-c] you will probably need to do some noise reduction in post processing anyway-so what's the diff?

It's really kind of sad to move on. I've gotten some great images/memories with my 30D's and made some money too. Seeing Steve's photos of the mystic white bog weasle made me realize what the 20D/30D bodies are capable of if you know how to use them-they are capable of alot!

I will probably list my really mint 30D on here to see if someone needs it. I'll keep the other one around for awhile-just to be safe!

MM, shoot me an e-mail on the 30D if you'd like.

Buzz, I have no doubt the Mk3 has its issues. They are well documented. For $2,300, I'd still grab one up in a heartbeat if I had the jing, because my business income is largely derived from weddings and photo excursions, not from photography accomplished at the dull point of the the Mk3's lance. Of course, I'm now eyeing a Mk2n from someone I know personally that's so cheap it makes me blush just to think about buying it. The IQ on the Mk2n with 8 Mp on a 1.3 crop sensor has been wonderful the times I've used them.

As for the Mp race, I'm not involved. I've had so much luck with large prints off 8 Mp sensors I don't care about moving up until my 20D/30Ds wear out and the others come down in price. When it comes to the Mk3, I'm basically just an interested bystander who's talked with several pros who have used the body (some with issues and some without), but I am not directly impacted because it's a lot more body than I need for what I do.

Sweet MM. Congratulations on the camera. I really think you will like the 50D. Did you get my mail?