Canon 1.3x Crop Sensor.

Dale.

Dale.

Bo Derek
Suspended / Banned
Messages
13,716
Name
Dale.
Edit My Images
Yes
This will probably be the shortest thread ever but here goes.

I have a chance of a 1DMk4 which is reasonably priced. One of the reasons I'm upgrading is that the low light performance and general image quality of my 7D is dissapointing, at best and whilst full FF would be better in that respect, I'm wondering if a 1.3x crop sensor would be a halfway house, literally or closer to FF image quality or CS quality? I don't think my 7D does my lovely L glass justice and I'm keen to find out if the 1.3 crop of the 1D4 would be better or just not worth it. A 5D3 is something I can't justify at new prices.

ta.

oh, :withstupid:

;)
 
Not used either myself but I did a bit of research into this recently and some of the info I found was that The 1d4 looked like it handled noise similiar too (if not slightly better than) a 7d2.
 
If you're talking about the original 7D then it's a no brainer, the 1D4 will offer a huge improvement. The 7D2 however is a lot closer but the general consensus would still favour the 1D4.
If the price is right I'd go for it as I don't think you'd be disappointed.
 
The 1d4 can only take EF and not EF-S lenses aswell I believe? (Please correct me if I'm wrong) so could be worth considering.
 
AdamTudor said:
Not used either myself but I did a bit of research into this recently and some of the info I found was that The 1d4 looked like it handled noise similiar too (if not slightly better than) a 7d2.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. (y) The noise is my biggest bug bear with my 7, it's a MK1. I hate it!!

wardy07 said:
If you're talking about the original 7D then it's a no brainer, the 1D4 will offer a huge improvement. The 7D2 however is a lot closer but the general consensus would still favour the 1D4.
If the price is right I'd go for it as I don't think you'd be disappointed.
Click to expand...

Yip, my 7 is a Mk1. I had considered a Mk2 but it's a pricey upgrade and despite the new sensor, I'm wary of it in low light.

AdamTudor said:
The 1d4 can only take EF and not EF-S lenses aswell I believe? (Please correct me if I'm wrong) so could be worth considering.
Click to expand...

EF is fine, as it's L I would be using. I invested in some L glass over the last 2 years and my 7D isn't doing it justice. A mate of mine made a telling comment to me a while back " go FF and let your glass shine", a comment I can't forget. I've been tempted by the 6D but one of my passions is wildlife, the other landscapes. Even a s/h 5D3 in good condition is upwards of 1.5k, a lot of money for something that might be halfway through it's life.

May save for a 5DMk4. ;)
 
What price have you been offered on a 1d4 then? I looked into getting one for wildlife and landscapes but buying wide L glass isn't cheap
 
AdamTudor said:
What price have you been offered on a 1d4 then? I looked into getting one for wildlife and landscapes but buying wide L glass isn't cheap
Click to expand...

£1200 but I'm waiting on a shutter count.
 
Dale. said:
Even a s/h 5D3 in good condition is upwards of 1.5k, a lot of money for something that might be halfway through it's life.

May save for a 5DMk4. ;)
Click to expand...

You are looking in the wrong places! I paid approx £1,050 for mine (difficult to say exactly as bought with a lens) and was in excellent condition will approx 20,000 shutter count. I've seen a few sell on here for between £1,100 and £1,200
 
Dale. said:
Thanks for that. (y) The noise is my biggest bug bear with my 7, it's a MK1. I hate it!!



Yip, my 7 is a Mk1. I had considered a Mk2 but it's a pricey upgrade and despite the new sensor, I'm wary of it in low light.



EF is fine, as it's L I would be using. I invested in some L glass over the last 2 years and my 7D isn't doing it justice. A mate of mine made a telling comment to me a while back " go FF and let your glass shine", a comment I can't forget. I've been tempted by the 6D but one of my passions is wildlife, the other landscapes. Even a s/h 5D3 in good condition is upwards of 1.5k, a lot of money for something that might be halfway through it's life.

May save for a 5DMk4. ;)
Click to expand...
You'll definitely get better low light performance with the 1D4 over the 7D2, high ISO is the downfall of both 7 series bodies.
 
Not sure what you photograph, but one major drawback of the 1DIV is the 1.3 crop which means you lose the wide angle lenses, but can't use the ef-s wides to compensate. Not an issue of course if you only ever use teles. If you have a 24-70mm, the wide end becomes 32mm for example.
 
I had a 1D3 which expired in April ,I replaced it with a 80D which is nearly as fast as a 7D2 and gives far better high ISO shooting ,once n/r is applied of course .
But I really really miss the feel and handling and the lovely clean files of the 1 series bodies ,as soon as circumstances allow I will also be looking for a 1D4 get one you won't regret it
 
I went from a 1D Mark III to a 1D Mark IV. The latter is unquestionably a better camera, but I don't have any experience with the other models that you mention.

Black & White Horse by wakarimasen1, on Flickr

All of the rugby photos on my flickr stream are with a 1D Mark IV and the 100-400 F4.5-5.6L lens - the first version. They are nothing special, but without doubt, I am the weakest link in the outfit. :banana:
 
Last edited:
Brachytron said:
Not sure what you photograph, but one major drawback of the 1DIV is the 1.3 crop which means you lose the wide angle lenses, but can't use the ef-s wides to compensate. Not an issue of course if you only ever use teles. If you have a 24-70mm, the wide end becomes 32mm for example.
Click to expand...

Which doesn't leave much of a cheap choice, other than maybe a used 16-35 or 17-35
 
AdamTudor said:
There's one at wex for £999 137,000 shutter
Click to expand...

Good price but lots of mileage. ;-) Thanks for looking for me.

mike_6480 said:
You are looking in the wrong places! I paid approx £1,050 for mine (difficult to say exactly as bought with a lens) and was in excellent condition will approx 20,000 shutter count. I've seen a few sell on here for between £1,100 and £1,200
Click to expand...

I'll watch the classifieds here. :-)

wardy07 said:
You'll definitely get better low light performance with the 1D4 over the 7D2, high ISO is the downfall of both 7 series bodies.
Click to expand...

Low light is certainly the dowhfall of my 7D1, which is why I've never got myself a Mk2. :-)

Brachytron said:
Not sure what you photograph, but one major drawback of the 1DIV is the 1.3 crop which means you lose the wide angle lenses, but can't use the ef-s wides to compensate. Not an issue of course if you only ever use teles. If you have a 24-70mm, the wide end becomes 32mm for example.
Click to expand...

Wildlife and landscapes for me. If I go FF, my widest lens would be 20mm, 24-105L. I have a Sigma 10-20 f3.5 but that's for crop only.

the black fox said:
I had a 1D3 which expired in April ,I replaced it with a 80D which is nearly as fast as a 7D2 and gives far better high ISO shooting ,once n/r is applied of course .
But I really really miss the feel and handling and the lovely clean files of the 1 series bodies ,as soon as circumstances allow I will also be looking for a 1D4 get one you won't regret it
Click to expand...

Thanks.

wakarimasen said:
I went from a 1D Mark III to a 1D Mark IV. The latter is unquestionably a better camera, but I don't have any experience with the other models that you mention.

Black & White Horse by wakarimasen1, on Flickr


All of the rugby photos on my flickr stream are with a 1D Mark IV and the 100-400 F4.5-5.6L lens - the first version. They are nothing special, but without doubt, I am the weakest link in the outfit. :banana:
Click to expand...

Looks sharp and clean enough there.

AdamTudor said:
Which doesn't leave much of a cheap choice, other than maybe a used 16-35 or 17-35
Click to expand...

or a sigma.

wakarimasen said:
A used 17-40 F4L lens is a pretty good option.
Click to expand...

My friend has that lens, he loves it.

jj_glos said:
There could be a 1D4 heading to the classifieds shortly, if I like this X-T2 enough...
Click to expand...

I'll keep my eye on that. Don't mention Fuji though, I have a T-10 and love it, much better than my 7D. ;-)
 
AdamTudor said:
Or sell it all and buy a d500 ;)
Click to expand...

Now there is the dilemma. The only thing that is really stopping me changing brands is the glass I have invested in and the hit I would take if I were to trade it. Even at s/h prices, it would be a very significant loss. If it were 5 year plus old glass, I wouldn't mind so much but it's all fairly recent and would involve a big hit. I don't have any allegiance to any particular brand, although I do love the Fuji system I have but Canon crop sensors fall short for me at the moment, hence the purpose of this thread, to see if the 1D4 could compare to a full FF Canon body and "let my glass shine".
 
Gary Kinghorn said:
I have a 7d mk2, 5d Mk3 and a 1d Mk4. If I had to get rid of the others and keep just one, it would be the 1d Mk4. A fabulous camera in my mind.
Click to expand...

5D3 was in the running but there's my answer on that one. (y)
 
Dale. said:
Thanks for that. (y) The noise is my biggest bug bear with my 7, it's a MK1. I hate it!!



Yip, my 7 is a Mk1. I had considered a Mk2 but it's a pricey upgrade and despite the new sensor, I'm wary of it in low light.



EF is fine, as it's L I would be using. I invested in some L glass over the last 2 years and my 7D isn't doing it justice. A mate of mine made a telling comment to me a while back " go FF and let your glass shine", a comment I can't forget. I've been tempted by the 6D but one of my passions is wildlife, the other landscapes. Even a s/h 5D3 in good condition is upwards of 1.5k, a lot of money for something that might be halfway through it's life.

May save for a 5DMk4. ;)
Click to expand...

To add something else into the equation, the 6d is very good for wildlife! Some say the AF limits that but I don't find that at all.
 
Archie747 said:
I seen this result in other comparisons, any particular reasons?
Click to expand...
I couldn't answer that in a scientific manner. I've never truly gelled with the 7d2. It's getting better but it's still not the one I would reach for. The 5d3 is a great camera and if I was shooting people it's the one I use. However for me a decent amount of my images are at a bird of prey centre, at longleat or other such places. The extra reach of the 1d comes in useful. I also prefer the rugged nature of the 1d series.

The 1d4 just feels right for me...
 
I owned a MkIV for 2 1/2 years and then added a 5D MkIII and used the two for around a year side by side.

When I first bought my 5D i was so impressed with it that I put my MkIV up for sale. I thought that as an allround camera the 5D was without equal (1DX excepted). I still consider the 5 the best value for money camera that Canon has made for a long time.

I posted this a good while ago but for what it's worth these were my thoughts then.

5D MkIII

PROS.

AF is better than the MkIV overall.
High ISO performance is better than MkIV.
More options for customising various buttons to get the camera how you want it.
Much easier access to Live View.
AF to f8
Better screen to review images.
Build quality OK.

CONS

Only 6FPS. This is the biggest issue for me.
Inferior build quality.
No crop factor.

1D MkIV

PROS.

Slightly more reach with the crop factor.
AF still very capable.
Superb build quality.
Faster frame rate has its uses.
AF to f8.

CONS.

Review screen too small.
ISO performance not as good as 5D
Not quite as user friendly in its customisation.

I didnt sell my MkIV and I'm now glad of that fact. Its still a very capable camera and produces superb images. I tend to use it when i want a bit more reach or the faster frame rate.

Dropping from the 1.3 crop to FF of the 5D isnt such a big jump. Cropping the 5d image to the same viewpoint still leaves you with plenty. 13 MP against the 16MP of the MkIV.

The MkIV is faster to initially acquire focus but it doesnt hang onto it as well as the 5D.

The MkIV ISO performance isnt as good as the 5D. The difference starts to become quite noticable above ISO 2000 and I wont use the MkIV above 2500. On the 5D i have A3 prints taken at ISO 2000 and they are superb. I also have A4 prints from ISO 5000 files that are very good also. What I do like about the 5D files is that they seem very easy to process. Even high ISO files in LR come good very easily.

I much prefer the MkIV body size. The built in grip is much better than a body with a grip attached. And the weather sealing on the MkIV is much better

If I had to sell one of the bodies then I would sell the MKIV. The 5D is the better all round camera.

The MkIV is still a great camera and is no slouch when it comes to producing the goods. It was the best Canon had up to the release of the 1DX and will still give a good account of itself up against newer bodies such as the 7D MkII

I should point out that my opinions are based around my own use which is primarily wildlife.


Gaz
 
So Gary if you were to have to pick one now, a 1dmk4 or a 7d2, which would you got for. I not you say the mk4 gives a good account of itself against newer bodies so just interested buddy. I own a 5d3 and have been looking for a second body for sports/action/wildlife specifically.
 
antc said:
So Gary if you were to have to pick one now, a 1dmk4 or a 7d2, which would you got for. I not you say the mk4 gives a good account of itself against newer bodies so just interested buddy. I own a 5d3 and have been looking for a second body for sports/action/wildlife specifically.
Click to expand...

Does this mean you have issues with the 5diii for sports/action/wildlife or you just need a different body with similar qualities as a back-up?
 
Archie747 said:
Does this mean you have issues with the 5diii for sports/action/wildlife or you just need a different body with similar qualities as a back-up?
Click to expand...

I don't think he's said that, he's just after a decent second body?

The 5d3 is excellent for action / sports.
 
I have the 1d mk 4 and 5d3 and 2. I would say from a noise point of view the mk4 would have similar performance to the 5d2. I was actually thinking of selling it though as the weight is a pain in the ars.............back when doing a 12 hour wedding .and if anyone's interested I'd let it go for a lot less than £1200 ;-)
 
stumac said:
I have the 1d mk 4 and 5d3 and 2. I would say from a noise point of view the mk4 would have similar performance to the 5d2. I was actually thinking of selling it though as the weight is a pain in the ars.............back when doing a 12 hour wedding .and if anyone's interested I'd let it go for a lot less than £1200 ;-)
Click to expand...


If you do decide to sell it, get in the classifieds and I'll take a look. I can't promise, as I'm undecided but I'd be keen to see it. (y)
 
I'm presuming that the 5DIII is better than the 1D4 at higher iso, lower light? That's been one of my bug bears with the 7D1, the noise really is awful and can only be lessened by exposing to the right and risking blowing the whites.

So, CS is out for me, it has to be FF or the 1.3. What are the views on noise levels with the 1.3 crop sensor, versus FF please? Is the 1.3 comparable or better than say a 7D2. I compare those too as I have a reasonable idea of what a 7D2 might be like.

ta.
 
Dale. said:
I'm presuming that the 5DIII is better than the 1D4 at higher iso, lower light? That's been one of my bug bears with the 7D1, the noise really is awful and can only be lessened by exposing to the right and risking blowing the whites.

So, CS is out for me, it has to be FF or the 1.3. What are the views on noise levels with the 1.3 crop sensor, versus FF please? Is the 1.3 comparable or better than say a 7D2. I compare those too as I have a reasonable idea of what a 7D2 might be like.

ta.
Click to expand...

Yes, the 5d3 is better at high ISO.
 
antc said:
High quality second body, an extra few fps wouldn't hurt.
Click to expand...

I would recommend the 7Dii given the extra fps, quality autofocus system and extra reach, but as I have one I am probably biased. How it compares with the 1Div and 5Diii I cannot comment but compared with other FF cameras I expect the low light performance and IQ will not be as good as you are used to, but as back-up camera is still very good. Or get another 5D iii or a 5Div!
 
Right ho, it's narrowed down to 1D4 or 5DIII. I don't think the low light performance of a CC will give me what I want and bearing in mind I already have a 7D1, opting a 7D2 is an expensive upgrade, great camera though it is.

There's that comment again " go FF and let your glass shine". ;)
 
130k on a 1DIV is not a lot!
I bought mine 18 months ago with 94K without a second thought.
I also use a 5D3. I take both for football matches, the 1D with a 70-200 2.8 IS II attached, the 5D3 with a 400 f5.6L.
IQ is a lot better with the 5D3, but the frame rate is too low. If I had to take just one body it'd be the 1D, solely as it's better weather sealed with the 70-200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top