The Mother of all Cameras

The Canon EOS 1D Mark III


This page is optimized for
 
NOTE: images on this page will appear washed out on Macintosh machines. 
If you're using a Macintosh, please go to the gamma uncorrected version of this page by clicking HERE.





I got mine at Amazon, but you can also get it at Adorama or B&H.

Skip right to the SAMPLE PHOTOS.




I have often wondered what it must be like to drive a Ferrari, or a Lamborghini, or even just a Porche.  I've yet to find out.  I have, however, had the opportunity to use (and now own) the camera-equivalent of a turbo-charged, top-of-the-line, luxury sports car (and an expensive one at that!), in the form of the flagship Canon "pro" body, the infamous EOS 1D Mark III.



Photo of 1D Mark III, taken with a Canon 30D.

I honestly never thought I would ever own such an expensive and sophisticated piece of equipment.  I've taken pride over the years in my (modest) ability to push cheaper equipment to the extremes, to extract the highest quality performance from less-than-perfect tools.  I did this for many years with cheap electric guitars, cheap binoculars, cheap computers, cheap software.  And in the arena of digital photography I think I've extracted some number of fairly high-quality photos from non-pro bodies, especially from the lowly Canon EOS 30D, which despite its age and sub-$1000 retail price still produces amazing images from time to time.  Indeed, I had grown so fond of my well-worn pair of 30D's and their remarkable image quality (when properly operated), that I had begun to doubt whether higher-quality images were even obtainable with any earthly gear of any brand or price. 

I was wrong.

The image quality from my new EOS 1D Mark III is truly a level above that of any camera I've used before.  The noise levels in image backgrounds are so low at normal ISO speeds that I wonder whether I'm looking at a computer image at all, or whether somebody has scotch-taped a premium-quality print from a film camera onto the front of my computer screen.

(click to zoom)

Carolina Wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/320 sec, RAW

Because the 1D series all employ a 1.3x crop factor, the depth-of-field is reduced somewhat relative to that of a 1.6x crop-factor camera such as the 30D or the newer 40D.  What this means for bird photography (my personal passion) is that at any given aperture the subject tends to be more isolated from the background, resulting in more striking images.

(click to zoom)
Downy Woodpecker (Picoides pubescens).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/11, ISO 800, 1/125 sec, RAW

It should be noted that I've also noticed a very significant difference between the image quality of out-of-camera JPEGs versus RAW images as displayed by Canon's "DPP" software.  The RAWs have far less noise than the JPEGs, even before any noise-reduction software is applied, which is something that I was not previously aware of.  I knew that JPEG encoding involved some degree of image compression, which could conceivably reduce image quality in subtle ways, but I was not prepared for the magnitude of the difference between the RAW images and the out-of-camera JPEGs.

(click to zoom)

Brown-headed Nuthatch (Sitta pusilla).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/160 sec, RAW

Unfortunately, RAW images from a 10 megapixel camera run about 12 Mb in size, which places rather stricter requirements on one's in-field memory resources than when using JPEGs.  Previously I carried a total of 12 Mb of Compact Flash (CF) cards with me at all times, and had never as of yet run out of memory in the field with my current setup (which included two 8.2 megapixel cameras, both Canon EOS 30D's).  For the 1D Mark III in RAW mode I am figuring I will need at most 48 Gb (!) worth of memory cards in the field; this is based on my maximum memory-card usage during intense photography trips to such places as San Diego or the Atlantic flyway during fall migration.  With high-capacity 8 Mb cards this is entirely feasible, though with a significant outlay of cash ($500 or so, based on current CF card pricing).

(click to zoom)

Carolina Chickadee (Parus carolinus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/400 sec, JPEG-L

Fortunately, the 1D Mark III accepts Secure Digital (SD) cards in addition to Compact Flash (CF); SD cards tend to be 25% - 50% cheaper than CF cards of the same capacity.  Which of CF or SD is faster is not an easily resolved question, however, as each card has a different maximum bit transfer rate, as does each camera model.  In the case of the Canon EOS 1D Mark III, the maximum buffer capacity of 66 RAW images (or 30 in a single "burst" when the shutter button is held down continuously) means that in the field I am ulikely to ever be limited by the speed of my memory card, even if I use the slowest card available on the market today. 

That's a good thing, since it means I can buy the cheapest memory cards available.  Note that in the past I've always bought the cheapest cards I could find, except for one instance in which I "splurged" and bought a super-expensive "premium" card (a Lexar 133x CF card).  That's the only card that ever failed in the field.  So, the moral of the story is: with the Mark III (assuming you shoot like I do --- one carefully calculated frame at a time) you can use the cheapest memory cards available (whether SD or CF).  The most important thing is to have enough memory (even if cheap memory) to shoot everything in RAW.



(click to zoom)

House Finch (Carpodacus mexicanus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/640 sec, JPEG-L

An obvious question for any prospective owner of a 1D camera is whether the pixel count is high enough for his/her needs---i.e., is the higher megapixel count of the (much more expensive) 1Ds model worth the roughly 2x price as compared to the corresponding 1D model?  I could not say for sure, without using a 1Ds first-hand, whether the higher megapixel count of that model would translate into better bird photos. What I can say for certain is that the 10 megapixels of the 1D Mark III have been enough to capture the subjects I've worked with so far.  Although my 30D has a significantly higher pixel density (in terms of pixels per unit area on the image sensor), I'm far happier with the output of my Mark III than my 30D (though I'm keeping both my 30D's as backups).

For some pretty damn convincing evidence for
the utility of the Mark III for serious bird photography, click HERE .


(click to zoom)

Carolina Chickadee (Parus Carolinus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/800 sec, JPEG-L

At this point, a note or two about megapixel ratings is probably warranted.  Although megapixels might seem (to the uninitiated) to serve as a perfectly objective measure of a camera's capacity to produce high-quality images, the relation between total megapixels, pixel density, and image quality is somewhat confounded by other factors not reflected (directly) in the megapixel count.  As I explained in my Megapixels Demystified article, the pixel density---i.e., the number of pixels per unit area on the image sensor---will (in theory) serve as a better indication of the detail-capturing potential of a particular camera model, since the density of pixels limits the theoretical maximum of the number of distinct image details which can be represented.  In practice, however, the empirical resolution of an image sensor emerges as the observed tradeoff between pixel density and pixel fidelity---that is, the perceived resolution of the resulting image will vary in proportion to the pixel density and in inverse proportion to the average noise level of the individual pixels.  Thus, the optimal megapixel count in terms of final image resolution will depend on both the pixel density (i.e., the megapixel rating in combination with the crop factor) and on the per-pixel noise level.  Unfortunately, there appears to be a tradeoff between pixel densities and noise level, so that for larger densities (such as on the newly announced Canon EOS XSi model) there will tend to be greater noise, simply due to the physics of light-collection at small photosites on a CMOS sensor.


(click to zoom)

Yellow-rumped Warbler (Dendroica coronata).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/1000 sec, RAW

In the case of the EOS 1D Mark III, the 10 megapixels delivered by the camera's imaging sensor have quite excellent noise characteristics, due to the use of larger micro-lenses at each photosite.  Although the actual area of light-gathering sensitivity for each pixel occupies only a small area of the photosite allocated to each pixel, photons which would otherwise elude the sensitive area of the photosite are in many cases redirected toward the sensitive area by the tiny micro-lens which is positioned over each photosite for the purpose of focusing light rays within the photosite onto the much smaller pixel sensor in the middle of the photosite.  The result is that individual pixels are able to gather more photons per unit time, so that when averaged over the entire image we see less "noise" due to sampling error of small pixel sensors active over finite sampling periods.  In terms of image quality, the backgrounds tend to be smoother, with less speckling than in images produced by inferior sensors.

(click to zoom)

House Finch (Carpodacus mexicanus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/800 sec, RAW

Some other nice features of the Mark III are the 14-bit color, the self-cleaning sensor, the autofocus "microadjust" capability, and the 300,000-cycle shutter rating. The 14-bit color allows for smoother color gradations --- I remarked on this feature in my review of the Canon EOS 40D, since that model also features the new 14-bit A/D conversion hardware.  Another feature shared by these two models is the self-cleaning image sensor, which utilizes a vibrating filter over the sensor to reduce the incidence of dust specks in images.

(click to zoom)

American Robin (Turdus migratorius).
Canon 1D Mark III + Canon 400mm f/4 lens + 2x TC.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/2500 sec, JPEG-L

The autofocus "microadjust" feature was one of the primary reasons for my purchasing the Mark III. Over the past year or so I have been noticing subtle differences in focusing accuracy of different lenses when attached to different camera bodies. The problem is that cameras and lenses can become uncalibrated (and unfortunately, many of them arrive direct from the factory in a poorly calibrated state, due to Canon's terrible quality-control at their factory).

More precisely, a camera and lens need to be properly calibrated to each other in order for the autofocus function to produce perfect in-focus photos. Otherwise, the camera can end up focusing slightly in front of or behind the subject. These front-focus and back-focus problems, when severe enough, can ruin an otherwise perfect photo. Sometimes a front-focusing lens in combination with a back-focusing camera can result in good images, since the front-focusing and back-focusing cancel each other out. The idea behind AF microadjust is to allow you to fine-tune your camera to correct for lenses which have a slight front- or back-focusing problem. Each of your lenses can be separately adjusted; the Mark III recognizes which lens is attached and automatically applies the preset microadjust during shooting. I haven't had time to do the AF microadjust on my camera yet, but I've read accounts of others (including pro bird photographer, Art Morris) who have noticed a significant improvement in autofocus accuracy after using this feature.


(click to zoom)

Yellow-rumped Warbler (Dendroica coronata).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 400, 1/1000 sec, RAW


The 300,000-cycle shutter rating on this model was a fairly minor selling point for me, though I do think it is an attractive feature, at least in a psychological sense.  Knowing that I can expect to (with high probability) take over 300,000 photos with this camera before the shutter mechanism fails is somewhat reassuring, given the high cost of the camera --- I'd certainly like to hope that such an expensive piece of equipment will last a long time.  In reality, however, a shutter failure is not the end of the world.  When the shutter eventually breaks I just have to send in the camera to Canon to have a new shutter installed, at a price of about $200 or $300.  At the rate I'm going, I shouldn't hit 300,000 for probably 5 years or so, and by then I will almost certainly have upgraded to a newer model.  Five years in any digital electronics field is practically forever.

Even the lower-end models have expected shutter lives of 100,000 or more.  Keep in mind that this is merely a statistical expectation (usually based on the Weibull distribution).  A shutter with a 100,000-cycle rating may last 200,000 cycles, or even longer, if you're lucky.  A lot of people shopping for used cameras on eBay are obsessed with shutter actuation counts, which I think is a distraction.  When the shutter fails you can have it fixed. It's not a big deal.  If I were buying used cameras on eBay I'd be more concerned with trying to avoid scams.

(click to zoom)

Eastern Bluebird (Sialia sialis).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/400 sec, JPEG-L

The Mark III isn't just the most expensive camera I've ever owned: it's also the heaviest. It's a hefty 2.5 lbs., which, with my Canon 580EX II flash and Canon CP-E4 external power pack (with 8 AA batteries) attached, ends up nearly doubling the weight of my 400mm f/4 lens setup. What I really do like, however, is that the camera is solidly constructed. It feels really, really solid in my hands. It feels expensive (which it should, since it is). It's just like that scene in Jurassic Park:

Kid: Whoa, cool! Night-vision goggles!
Lawyer:
Are they heavy?

Kid: Yeah.
Lawyer: Then they're expensive. Put them back.

In all seriousness, the construction of the camera is impressive.  Just seeing the built-in viewfinder shutter for the first time made me literally stop and say Whoa! in Keanu-Reeves fashion. Rather than a plastic outer body as with virtually all prosumer cameras like the 30D and 40D, the Mark III has a metal exterior, which promises to outlast my venerable 30D's at least in terms of mechanical robustness.  I've already taken the Mark III down in the mud ("belly-deep in duck-crap") at the local duck pond, and didn't regret it.  This is a real camera.  And I've read that the weatherproofing, when mounted with an L-series lens, renders the camera perfectly safe from rain.  Wicked.

The camera comes with a dual-battery charger, which will come in handy when I get around to buying a spare battery.  So far, the battery life seems to be outstanding.  I've read of Mark III owners getting thousands and thousands of images on a single charge.


(click to zoom)

Blue Jay (Cyanocitta Cristata).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/800 sec, JPEG-L


So, what about that autofocus issue that everybody keeps talking about in reference to the 1D Mark III?  So far I haven't had any problems whatsoever.  My hope is that it's been long enough now that the cameras currently shipping from reputable merchants (such as Amazon, where I got mine) have any "fixes" built in already.  What I can say for certain is that the performance has so far been excellent, and is certainly far better than either the 30D or 40D cameras that I've owned.  I have no doubt that the issues reported by Rob Galbraith are real, and adversely affected the bodies he (and many others) have tested.  My copy is a recently-manufactured one, which seems to be working fine.  I've obviously not tested it in hot weather, since it's now only February (though temperatures have been as high as 77F recently here in North Carolina), so I can't be sure that it won't suddenly start to malfunction when summer arrives.  Canon has recently announced that they've found the "root cause" of the AF issues previously encountered by Mark III users, so hopefully this will soon be a thing of the past.  For the present, I'm enjoying my Mark III like I never imagined.

(click to zoom)

  American Robin (Turdus migratorius).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/800 sec, JPEG-L


The Mark III is certainly a more complex beast than the "prosumer" bodies I've used before (i.e., the Canon 30D and 40D).  I think this is a good thing.  The camera has many "custom functions" (many more than on the prosumer models) which you can play with to find the optimal settings for your shooting style. There are things like Highlight Tone Priority (which can reduce the incidence of "blown highlights" on birds with white patches in bright sunlight), autofocus behavior policies (such as how quickly the camera should abandon its current focus subject when another, closer, subject intrudes into the scene), and many others. Fortunately, the default settings work well enough that you can just take the camera right out of the box and into the field to do some shooting right away.  Tweaking the settings can be done progressively as you get to know the camera and its behavior better.

(click to zoom)

American Robin (Turdus migratorius).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/1000 sec, JPEG-L


So, what don't I like about the camera?  So far, nothing.  I did have a brief issue with the flash exposure, but after researching this on the internet I found that the "high-speed synch" mode which I was using on my 580EX II flash unit was the culprit.  Apparently, the high-speed synch mode requires rather more user intervention in setting the appropriate power level.  I don't recall this being the case with my 30D, but for now I've turned off the high-speed synch on the Mark III and haven't had any problems whatsoever.  The Mark III has a maximum synch speed of 1/300 sec, which has been more than adequate for my birding needs.  Indeed, on a number of occasions I've had to stop down or reduce the ISO speed to avoid over-exposure, and this has only improved the image quality of my photos.

Be sure to check out the additional sample images linked below (all taken within my first 48 hours with the camera).
Better yet, check out my newer photo album of 125 bird photos taken during my first month with the camera.




Some More Sample Images



American Robin (Turdus migratorius).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/640 sec, JPEG-L



Pine Warbler (Dendroica pinus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Canon 400mm f/4 DO lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/3200 sec, RAW


Hooded Merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus).
Canon 1D Mark III + Canon 400mm f/4 DO lens.
400mm, f/4, ISO 800, 1/3200 sec, JPEG-L


Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/11, ISO 800, 1/1000 sec, JPEG-L



Common Shelduck (Tadorna tadorna)
Canon 1D Mark III + Canon 400mm f/4 DO lens.

400mm, f/4, ISO 800, 1/8000 sec, JPEG-L


Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/1600 sec, JPEG-L


Cedar Waxwing (Bombycila cedrorum).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/11, ISO 800, 1/320 sec, JPEG-L


Philippine Duck (Anas luzonica).
Canon 1D Mark III + Canon 400mm f/4 DO lens.
400mm, f/4, ISO 800, 1/4000 sec, JPEG-L


American Robin (Turdus migratorius).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/8, ISO 800, 1/320 sec, JPEG-L


Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias).
Canon 1D Mark III + Sigma 800mm f/5.6 lens.
800mm, f/11, ISO 800, 1/640 sec, JPEG-L


More sample 1D Mark III images HERE.




return to
billmajoros.com