Lunch atop a (Springfield) skyscraper

Lunch atop a (Springfield) skyscraper
by andy-m                

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

1DSII is full-frame, meaning I can at least theoretically get a little more performance via slower shutter speeds without shake (using 1/f general rule of thumb). But the ISO limit is 3200 (H). Also I already have a 1DII and am familiar with its (somewhat peculiar) button-pressing the 1DII and 1DSII use the same batteries.

On the other hand: 1DIII is APS-H (1.3x crop), ISO max is 6400. Plus it has newer DIGIC processors. But I know there was some concern about auto-focusing of the 1DIII (maybe very specific conditions?).

My use will be widely varied, but a big portion of what I do is dance photography (on-stage, with poor lighting) and it's one place where the camera/gear really does matter.

It's not too hard to find either of these bodies used, and the price is comparable. Which one is likely to serve me better?

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

When looking into camera gears I don't own, I use DxOMark to get an idea of perform and quality of certain aspect.

According to DxOMark, 1D mk3 able to produce "lower noise high ISO" image at up to 1078 ISO while 1Ds mk2 is at up to 1480 ISO, roughly 0.3 stop better.

share|improve this answer
Oh! Thanks for that link...don't know how I've managed to miss that. I have to say, that conclusion is a bit counter to my expectations, so I'm glad I asked!! – djangodude Feb 2 '12 at 23:58

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.