Canon's EOS-1D Mark III DSLR gets reviewed

Although Canon's powerful EOS-1D Mark III has priced itself right out of consideration for a large sect, the niche that has been waiting in tense anticipation to see a solid review of the unit need wait no more. The folks over at Digital Camera Info were able to put the beastly DSLR through a gauntlet of tests, and while it did end up shining gloriously in the bulk of them, one persistent problem seemed to mar the otherwise flawless camera. As expected, the design, speed, live LCD, color accuracy, noise / low light performance and controls were all highly praised, but the white balance and a nagging autofocus problem did prove troublesome. Granted, the reviewers did state that a firmware fix seemed to solve the issue, but it was apparently so aggravating that patient folks (who?) may want to consider holding off until things get ironed out. Nevertheless, the unit was still regarded as a fantastic DSLR, and if you've got five grand just burning a hole in your pocket, why not take some time out and read the full review before taking the plunge?

[Via DigitalPhotographyBlog]

[ian_h_uk @ Oct 15th 2007 10:54AM]

you know, ive been thinking for while, why dont you guys spin off a camera engadget!?

[Michael La Framboise @ Oct 15th 2007 11:23AM]

ffs, w/e they post - theres always someone who's gonna whine about it not being interesting to them... FFS! If you don't like the content here, go elsewhere! - its that simple.

[craig @ Oct 15th 2007 12:28PM]

you mean a whole section of Engadget devoted to linking to other people's work?

[GoR @ Oct 15th 2007 11:06AM]

Look out Canon... Nikon D3 is gonna eat your frickin lunch.

[Chinthaka @ Oct 15th 2007 11:25AM]

hell yeah baby... full frame and still has the main benefit of this cam... the fast ass burst mode! and a better live view etc and all... man the d3 still makes me pee in my pants

[Rex @ Oct 15th 2007 1:22PM]

Chinthaka,

Admitting to your problem is the first step. Congratulations! Involuntary or overactive bladder function is an embarrassing problem that affects many adults. Fortunately for you, now that you are facing up to your little leaky problem, there are a number of products on the market. Some adult diapers may help out. It'll restore your self-confidence, enabling you to actually get a life away from your computer, and sparing us both the intimate details of your adult incontinence problem and your asinine, ill-informed commentary on high-end digital SLRs.

Again, congratulations on admitting your problem, and best of luck.

[ian_h_uk @ Oct 15th 2007 11:27AM]

ooook.
did some one not have there orange juice for breakfast?
i didnt say anything bad about cameras, so where your anger is coming from is beyond me!
there are a fair few different engadgets, and i do personally believe that a photography orientated site would work.....
now down boy!

[kevjohn @ Oct 15th 2007 12:31PM]

This is neato stuff, but all things being equal I'd go with Nikon for the build quality and durability factor alone.
I think Canon still has the upper hand when it comes to lenses though. Slightly.

[fuma @ Oct 15th 2007 12:36PM]

@Chinthaka -
Get past the first page and you'll see -- "The Canon EOS-1D Mark III has a APS-H-sized 10.1-megapixel CMOS sensor"

tha's not full frame. I know some photographers like the 1.6x magnification of this camera, but for about $3900 LESS, you can get their rebel XTi and a couple sweet L IS lenses. If anyones even THINKING about spending over $3k for a DLSR, just bite it and buy the 21MP daddy-o EOS1Ds MKIII. Its only $3K more, and that the price of a decent lens or two.

[Geir E @ Oct 15th 2007 1:08PM]

First, it is 1.3x, not 1.6x. The rebel however is 1.6x.
Second, compare it to the rebel xti is insane. yes, both are cameras but the rebel will be a wet jigsaw puzzle where this really shine.

[Russell @ Oct 15th 2007 2:08PM]

Most of my recent pics were taken with a 1D3, and I've been quite happy with it:

http://russell.exphose.com/p879349595/

[Jeff Beck @ Oct 15th 2007 4:12PM]

For many, this camera is the holy grail--and I just cannot understand why when there are real and affordable alternatives that offer a full frame.

Compare the prices and features for the Canon EOS 1d Mark III:

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Mark-10-1MP-Digital-Camera/dp/B000NP1C5O/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0572457-7145764?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&tag=opensounds-20&qid=1192478278&sr=8-1


And the Canon EOS 5d:

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-5D-Digital-Camera/dp/B0007Y791C/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0572457-7145764?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&tag=opensounds-20&qid=1192478593&sr=1-1

and you will see just how much better the Canon 5d actually is when price is taken into account. I honestly cannot understand why even a professional would consider this camera when the Canon 5d is available at a fraction of the price with all of the features any professional actually needs.

[craig @ Oct 15th 2007 5:49PM]

The 5D has crappy build, low frame rates and poor autofocus. For photojournalists, the ones targeted by the 1D3, those drawbacks rule out the 5D.

[Jonah Briskin @ Oct 15th 2007 4:41PM]

Five grand? I wish! I think it retails for eight grand.

They're getting close to film with this resolution. I heard 20 megapixels compares to film when using standardized resolution charts. Very expensive though.

[craig @ Oct 15th 2007 5:49PM]

Wrong camera, and 35mm film was exceeded long ago.

[HonkeyWhitnigger @ Oct 15th 2007 6:34PM]

A

[HonkeyWhitnigger @ Oct 15th 2007 6:34PM]

Oops, last post was cut out for some reason. Point was, the 5D is NOT even close to this camera, for the reasons previously mentioned, such as fps, body build, 1.3x factor, etc. People with the 5D try so hard to buy a cheaper camera and pretend to be with the big boys. Well, you aren't no matter how often you folks spam threads such as this one.

As for a few other comments, this is NOT the 1Ds with 21 MP so know that you are confusing the two cameras.

The Mark III needs more AF problems resolved. I can't believe that on this page, this is the entire review from Murphy. I hit the link and got some other review, but on this page there isn't any review of any worth, so where is the actual review?

[HonkeyWhitnigger @ Oct 15th 2007 6:36PM]

DONK! Loser wiht a 5D. Get a pro camera and see what the buzz is all about before shouting out bile such as this. DONK!

[Drew @ Oct 16th 2007 1:40AM]

With how little Engadget knows about cameras, I don't think that's a good idea.

[Drew @ Oct 16th 2007 1:40AM]

First, you are wrong about the sensor size - APS-H is 1.3x crop. APS-C (used in the 10-40D and Digital Rebels) is 1.6x crop.

Second, you are insane! The XTi is *not* a competitor for the 1DmIII. They're entirely different markets - nobody would cross-shop the two.

[Drew @ Oct 16th 2007 1:41AM]

You're thinking of the 1Ds Mark III. Different camera from the 1D Mark III. The 1DmIII is going for $4500 while the 1DsmIII will go for around $8000.

Also, in most cases ~12mp digital will match or exceed the useful resolution of 35mm film.