The Canon 1Ds Mark III isn't for everyone. You really have to have a need for a lot of pixels to warrant buying one instead of the 1D Mark III, which offers very similar image quality, an extra stop of sensitivity and double the burst speed for thousands fewer pounds. For our style of shooting, we'd opt for the 1D Mark III and spend the savings on some primo lenses.
(Smaller bars indicate better performance)
|Time to first shot||
||Raw shot-to-shot time||
||Shutter lag (dim light)||
||Shutter lag (typical)||
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
That shouldn't diminish the 1Ds Mark III in any way, though. It is a unique imaging powerhouse and that can't be denied. If money were no object, we'd want one. The bigger question is whether current 1Ds Mark II owners should step up. That's a tough question. There, the difference in megapixels is more negligible. The real difference comes down to whether those extra pixels really mean something to you and whether you value the 1Ds Mark III's improvement in noise over its predecessor, which can't be discounted.
Ultimately, you have to ask if you've been disappointed in, or felt limited by, the 1Ds Mark II's performance and image quality. Of course, the 1Ds Mark III's larger screen, live view shooting and beefed up AF and exposure systems also give a reason to step up, though these aren't as big a motivation. Overall, we'd go for the upgrade, especially if it can be considered a business expense.
Additional editing by Shannon Doubleday