Why does the Canon 1D Mark III cost more than the 1D Mark IV ? According to snapsort it looks like the Mark IV is better.

Mark 3: $7995 http://www.amazon.com/Canon-1D-Mark-III-Digital/dp/B000NP1C5O/

Mark 4: $5399 http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-1D-Mark-IV/dp/B002TG3ZYQ/

And also on Canon's website:

Canon camera price comparison

  • 5
    Just from your image from Canon's website, it shows the EOS-1D Mark III as LESS expensive than the EOS-1D Mark IV, however the EOS-1Ds Mark III (note the 's') is shown as more expensive than the Mark IV. Are you sure you're comparing the same things? – seanmc Nov 15 '11 at 5:04
  • hmm... i did not notice the 's' on canon's website. thanks. that makes sense. what is the 's' for? And I can't figure out why it is more expensive on amazon.com's website - i believe it is the one without the 's'. also the 1dx is not yet available? – cwd Nov 15 '11 at 5:13
  • 1
    The "Canon EOS Digital SLR timeline (comparison)" at the bottom of Wikipedia's Canon camera pages (e.g. secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/…) may answer some of your questions. – user2910 Nov 15 '11 at 7:37
  • 1
    All those links show is that one seller has a high price for a product that is no longer made. This is common on amazon when not many people are selling a particular product – Dreamager Nov 15 '11 at 8:42
  • thanks for the comments, links, and answers. after reading all of them and also checking out the great chart on wikipedia i finally have a better understanding of the camera line canon offers :) – cwd Nov 15 '11 at 12:08

The EOS 1Ds Mark III is Canon's top-of-the-line full-frame DSLR: 21MP; 45 AF points; dual DIGIC III processors.

The EOS 1D Mark IV (that's 1D, not 1Ds) uses a 28.1 × 18.7mm sensor which is smaller than a 36 x 24mm full-frame, but bigger than the 22.3 × 14.9 mm sensor in the Rebel, 60D, 7D, etc.

The main tradeoff with the 1D Mark IV vs. the 1Ds is that you get a slightly lower image quality but continuous 10 fps shooting vs. only 5 fps on the 1Ds.


Well, on paper something might seem better but really they're different tools for different needs.

The biggest one I can think of is the MkIV isn't full frame, it's an APS-H instead, this does have a knock on effect on specific types of photography (I'm not a great believer in all kinds of photography need full frame, but it certainly helps with landscapes and portrait/fashion work). The other knock on's come from that, lower noise at low ISO ranges, better image quality and better colour depth.

The MkIV however is ridiculously fast, shooting 10FPS, and can record 1080p HD video, and it's lighter, and it's got a much, much higher top ISO. And cheaper.

The 1DS pulls a higher premium as it's designed for a different kind of photographer, and the full frame image sensor probably adds a nice chunk on, where as the MkVI is designed as the go to camera for everyday pro's who don't necessarily need the bonus features of the 1DS MkIII in terms of image quality. It then becomes the economy of scale for Canon, they probably know they'll sell more, meaning they can take a lower price on it.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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