Got a chance to use the Canon EOS 1D Mark III in a dark high school gym.

Seattle Prep visited Rainier Beach, which as one of your typically dim high school gyms.

Using the older Mark II, I could shoot at ISO 1000 without the digital noise (pixelation) blowing up. But staying down at ISO 1000 also meant my max shutter speed was about 1/250 sec, which is often too slow to capture fast moving action.

But I learned during the high school football season that I could dial up the ISO on the Mark III to ISO 3200 and still have an acceptable image.

Obviously lighting the gym would be the best scenario, but I wanted to see what the Mark III could do, so I shot at ISO 3200, 1/400 sec., f2.8. I know that math doesn't add up, but as I've stated here before, the Mark III seems to be a "darker" camera than the Mark IIN.

In other words, the one could shoot at a lower exposure with the Mark IIN. This in a way negates part of the allure that shooting ISO 3200 on the Mark III provides, since their respective exposure levels seem to be different.

Blah, blah, blah. Here are some samples. They have been slightly corrected for exposure and tone, but not noise-reduction. It's very passable for newsprint:

(Canon EOS 1D Mark III, EF 300mm/f2.8 lens, ISO 3200, 1/400 sec., f2.8)

(Canon EOS 1D Mark III, EF 300mm/f2.8 lens, ISO 3200, 1/400 sec., f2.8)

(Canon EOS 1D Mark III, EF 300mm/f2.8 lens, ISO 3200, 1/400 sec., f2.8)

Lots of folks have been asking me about the performance of the Mark III's vs. the Mark II's, and I'll address them soon, I promise.

Thanks for reading.