"To Mark-II or not to Mark-II"

[yalemba]

I am considering purchasing the Canon 1Ds Mark-II (16MP) as an upgrade to my 20D. My only hesitation is that Canon might announce a superior technology next month. Has anyone heard of an upgrade of 1Ds Mark-II? FYI, I intend to use my camera for studio photography; do you think that a higher mega-pixel camera might produce significantly better results?

[coreypolis]

there is a good chance that it will be announced.

do you need that high of resolution? what are you outputting the images to? web, print, magazine?

what about the 5d? at less than half the price but still FF and hihg resolution, you could spend a lot more on other aspects that may make a bigger impact to what you want to acheive

[Ronald S. Jr.]

do you think that a higher mega-pixel camera might produce significantly better results?

No, but it will produce significantly bigger results. ;-)

[coreypolis]

No, but it will produce significantly bigger results. ;-):lol:

[yalemba]

Yes, 5-D seems to be a good alternative, but I wonder if it is considered a truly "professional" camera (no offense to 5D owners)? I have noticed that professional digital photographer often use the 1Ds Mark-II with 70-200mm or 24-70mm.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Canon says the 5D is a pro body. You're afraid someone will think you're not professional enough with a $3k body? :rolleyes: Even if it weren't a pro body, it outperforms every 1-series available in high ISO performance and lens resolution. That includes the 1DsMkII.

[yalemba]

Yes, I am a bit worried about the perception, as I am considering starting a professional studio. Have you seen 5D in professional studio set up? Thanks.

[DJS]

I wouldn't worry too much about what the professionals are shooting with. Keep in mind, for every camera you see slung around some professionals neck, they have a few times more than that back at the studio. I agree wth Ronald, the 5D is a lot of camera for the money.

[dpastern]

Canon says the 5D is a pro body. You're afraid someone will think you're not professional enough with a $3k body? :rolleyes: Even if it weren't a pro body, it outperforms every 1-series available in high ISO performance and lens resolution. That includes the 1DsMkII.

That's a bit of an unfair comparison Ronald. The 1Ds Mark II is now, what, 18 months old? How old is the 5D? Of course it's going to be slightly better as its using newer technology. When the new 1Ds series is released in the next few months (according to rumours), can I rubbish the 5D performance?

In reality, the 1Ds Mark II is by all accounts a superb camera, many, many photographers happily use it, and many of them are professionals selling their images for a living. It it was crappy quality, they wouldn't use it. The 5D is a great camera though as well - if you don't need the build quality/AF/weather sealing of the 1 series cameras, the 5D might be a better buy in all honesty. Image quality is just not that much better in the 5D imho to justify junking a 1 series camera based on those grounds. Most people are NOT pixel peepers and it's a very unhealthy aspect of modern digital photography it seems.

Dave

[braduardo]

Yes, 5-D seems to be a good alternative, but I wonder if it is considered a truly "professional" camera (no offense to 5D owners)? I have noticed that professional digital photographer often use the 1Ds Mark-II with 70-200mm or 24-70mm.

Pros use what they need to do the job. A LOT of the pros in here use 10D, 20D, 30D, 5D, etc. You'll even find a couple that use a 350D, and probably a 300D or two. As far as lenses go, a 24-70mm won't do anything for someone chasing birds, and a 70-200mm won't be very good for shooting landscapes.

A pro is someone who makes a living off their photography. It really doesn't matter how expensive their equipment is, as long as it suits their usage. If you need a 1Ds MKII, go for it. If another camera suits your needs better, get that instead. Or whatever... It really comes down to how you want to spend your money. Personally I would say that if you don't KNOW that you need a 1Ds MkII, then you probably don't need it.

[Bubble]

do you think that a higher mega-pixel camera might produce significantly better results?

No. It's the features that comes with it. I think it's safe to buy the 1Ds now.

[cjm]

Wow that is such a huge step up. That is like going from a Ford Mustang (20D) to a Lamborgini!

5D is a pro body. It is a smaller more compact 1Ds MK1 but built like a 20D basically. Its like the took the best out of the two cameras and threw them into one body and it became the 5D.

Come tax refund season I will be considering a 5D or a 1D MKII N (or3?). Im not a pro or anything. Just a guy who likes to take pictures when he can.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

That's a bit of an unfair comparison Ronald. The 1Ds Mark II is now, what, 18 months old? How old is the 5D? Of course it's going to be slightly better as its using newer technology. When the new 1Ds series is released in the next few months (according to rumours), can I rubbish the 5D performance?

In reality, the 1Ds Mark II is by all accounts a superb camera, many, many photographers happily use it, and many of them are professionals selling their images for a living. It it was crappy quality, they wouldn't use it. The 5D is a great camera though as well - if you don't need the build quality/AF/weather sealing of the 1 series cameras, the 5D might be a better buy in all honesty. Image quality is just not that much better in the 5D imho to justify junking a 1 series camera based on those grounds. Most people are NOT pixel peepers and it's a very unhealthy aspect of modern digital photography it seems.

Dave

Oh I think it's a wonderful camera. However, just not for me. Those two aspects are very important to me. Even if I went and spent $6-7k on the 1DsMkII, I wouldn't be happy, because I need some quality ISO performance, and the 5D quite frankly has it beat there. I wasn't "junking" it. Far as I know, every 1-series body has the 5D beat in 90% of its functions.

[dpastern]

Is the high ISO difference really that noticeable? Just looking at dpreview, it seems so (for ISO 400 and above). Not by a huge amount, but I can see why some people would prefer the 5D. Interesting. The 1Ds Mark II was released back in September 2004, and the 5D in August 05 (nearly a year later)...hopefully noise levels improve again with the new model.

Dave

[Ronald S. Jr.]

I hope so too! While the 5D is sufficient, I don't feel the 1DsMkII would be. If this new model, whatever it is, is as much of an improvement over the 5D as it was over the MKII, I might be drawn in.

[grego]

If you are worried about how others view you, don't just think body. The 5D with good glass is better than crap glass with a super body. Then of course you need good lighting equipment. The photos will show off your skill and ability to create a picture. The 5D will do a good job with the right glass(and then of course the other variables).

[Permagrin]

Just from the two bodies I have/had, I can say that the 5D beats the heck out of the MKIIN in ISO. Having said that, I miss the speed of the MKIIN. But the 5D has incredible resolution, a lot better than the MKIIN. Having said that, I miss the weather proofing (which I don't think was over rated...). I also miss the freedom to use any lens I want...just about any lens worked like a dream on the MKIIN and at least one of my fav's doesn't (70-300DOIS) work so well on the 5D....but all in all, I just received my "pro" kit info from Canon (for the 5D) which was exactly the same that I received for the MKIIN....

I'm not sorry I switched but they each have incredible strengths that the other does really lack. Don't worry about what things "look like" just decide what you want and GO FOR IT! In a few years, you'll change your mind again (like we all do) and something else wonderful will be out to tempt you. ;)

[Jim G]

Just on the note of being concerned about appearing professional, 90% of the people who you shoot don't know jack about cameras and anything with a battery grip is immediately professional in most people's eyes :p I don't think that most people would be /that/ much more impressed by you holding a 1dsmkII over a 5D w/BG-E4.

Your needs count for alot more... IQ/AF/build quality/weather sealing. For studio work surely the 5D's AF would suffice..

[Mark_Cohran]

I am considering purchasing the Canon 1Ds Mark-II (16MP) as an upgrade to my 20D. My only hesitation is that Canon might announce a superior technology next month. Has anyone heard of an upgrade of 1Ds Mark-II? FYI, I intend to use my camera for studio photography; do you think that a higher mega-pixel camera might produce significantly better results?

I recently had the same dilemma. After a great deal of consideration, here's what I decided:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=206807

Mark

[Mark_Cohran]

Just from the two bodies I have/had, I can say that the 5D beats the heck out of the MKIIN in ISO. Having said that, I miss the speed of the MKIIN. But the 5D has incredible resolution, a lot better than the MKIIN. Having said that, I miss the weather proofing (which I don't think was over rated...).

I'm not sorry I switched but they each have incredible strengths that the other does really lack.

That's why I'm keeping both. :)

Mark

[The Limey]

That's why I'm keeping both. :)

Mark
I'm looking for the best off both just hope theirs a tweener in the next couple of days but not holding my breath
Graham

[Tareq]

just i am buying 1Dmk2N as it is the fastest camera and pro 1D-series body, and then i am waiting that new model to come, if not that much improvements as some said then so simple i will go for 1Ds2.

[Permagrin]

That's why I'm keeping both. :)

Mark

That wasn't an option for me...spent the budget on lenses so it was one body for now...in a few years maybe a back-up (luckily Dan's volunteered his 30D in an emergency).

[jevidon]

the only reason to i know of to go with a 1 series instead of the 5D is that some of the big publishers (e.g. AP, reuters, NYT, etc.) don't accept photos not shot on a 1-series... at least that's what I have been told. correct me if i'm wrong.

[grego]

the only reason to i know of to go with a 1 series instead of the 5D is that some of the big publishers (e.g. AP, reuters, NYT, etc.) don't accept photos not shot on a 1-series... at least that's what I have been told. correct me if i'm wrong.

Most of the big agencies supply their photogs with the equipment. There are still Nikon shooters. Honestly, they want results, so if someone used a 5D in a gym, they'd have less noise for say something like bball. Glass is what will make the biggest difference.

[jevidon]

indeed, it is all about the glass. my friends and family gave me a ton of grief and flack for spending the cash on the 70-200 2.8 ISL, but after they saw the pictures I was getting with the lens, the negative comments quickly turned into positive ones.

[yalemba]

Folks, thanks so much for educating me. Having read the latest "rumors," and with the knowledge that Canon now has the Digic III technology (in its press release), I'd like to defer my decision until the next 1Ds (Mark III??) annoucement later next month. If the new camera delivers 22MP, you will find me in the line to pick up the box!!!

[dpastern]

Folks, thanks so much for educating me. Having read the latest "rumors," and with the knowledge that Canon now has the Digic III technology (in its press release), I'd like to defer my decision until the next 1Ds (Mark III??) annoucement later next month. If the new camera delivers 22MP, you will find me in the line to pick up the box!!!

What press release referenced Digic III, cos I sure can't see it...

Dave

[ashdavid]

I also heard over here that it will be about 22 mega pixels.

[grego]

There was a slight slipup, Dave. It's no longer posted on the site, but here is the thread.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=207450

Of course it did not mention megapixels, but it did mention Digic III

[AeroSmith]

Take a look at the 1D MkIIn.

It has the same pixel density as the 5D (so high ISO performance is not as inferior as one might think). It also has the bigger 2.5" LCD, unlike the 1Ds. But it'll have the same amazing AF system and same rock solid weather resistant constructon of the 1Ds. And what it has that the 1Ds doesn't is the ability to shoot 8.5 fps. Did I mention it's a newer model and costs half as much as the 1Ds MkII? Canon can come out with whatever they want but my recent experience tells me that the 1D MkIIn is a stellar camera.

Also, more megapixels can be a two edged sword, i.e., file sizes

Check these 1D mkIIn shots out:
http://aerosmith.smugmug.com/gallery/1818874

Cheers,

Josh

PS, the 5D is amazing. I absolutely love mine.

[AeroSmith]

the only reason to i know of to go with a 1 series instead of the 5D is that some of the big publishers (e.g. AP, reuters, NYT, etc.) don't accept photos not shot on a 1-series... at least that's what I have been told. correct me if i'm wrong.

Well, the 1D has three times the AF points, a seperate processor just for AF and consequently much greater AF speed. Then there's the much greater fps rate. Not to mention weather sealing (maybe not so critical in the studio) and much greater programability. I'm sure I'm missing a host of other factors.

Don't get me wrong, the 5D rules the roost when it comes to shooting at ISO 1600. And the 5D is also easier to learn.

EDIT: but is high ISO so critical in a presumably well lit studio setting?

[flawlessly]

Well, the 1D has three times the AF points, a seperate processor just for AF and consequently much greater AF speed. Then there's the much greater fps rate. Not to mention weather sealing (maybe not so critical in the studio) and much greater programability. I'm sure I'm missing a host of other factors.

Don't get me wrong, the 5D rules the roost when it comes to shooting at ISO 1600. And the 5D is also easier to learn.

EDIT: but is high ISO so critical in a presumably well lit studio setting?
I think it doesn't matter cos most of us just use "Manual" mode with strobes. Once you set it and forget it!

[malla1962]

EDIT: but is high ISO so critical in a presumably well lit studio setting?[/quote]Not at all.:lol::lol::lol:

[Tareq]

Anyway, i can buy 1Dmk2 and 5D and 1Dsmk2 and that new 1Dsmk3, from all these i choose only 1Dmk2N and 1Dsmk3, no need for 5D, and mk3 instead of 1Dsmk2, something wrong?
i am a pixel peeper because i print very large size sometimes (A1+) and i need very high resolution, 5D is superior high resolution but simply 1Dsmk2 much higher.
I will get 1Dmk2N because i am planning to get into wildlife and sports, 30D is amazing but 1D is top.
about FF i have one choice, either 5D or 1Dsmk2 or mk3, i will choose the higher wether if some of you don't need higher, it is my need for higher as i can print any large size as i work in engineering and we print drawings in A0 so i do the same for buildings photos, am i wrong? and i will open a studio, so then i will print very large size not for costumers but for myself, so i need as much higher i can get, i was thinking to get a Meduim or large format but moving from film to digital (by using digital back for example) will cause me to hate photography even it is interesting.

so the end of story, i will buy 1Dmk2N and 1dsmk(X) and not looking back at all even some of you still using 10d and get perfect results.

[jevidon]

i have seen nothing but stellar results out of the 5D. Weathersealing would be nice to have, especially having all weather-sealed lenses, but I can live without it for a while.

[AeroSmith]

I think it doesn't matter cos most of us just use "Manual" mode with strobes. Once you set it and forget it!

If you mean manual exposure mode, the 1D still has countless advantages. For one the AF (auto focus) system in the 1D MkIIn blows the doors of the 5D'd AF (auto focus) system, not just in speed but in accuracy.

Heck, my wife had her own studio for a decade and shot with a crappy old Nikon 8008 film camera (and the strobes of which you speak) so my guess is any Canon DSLR can get the job done.

But the original poster is thinking 1Ds MkII and I was just thinking he could get his pro 1D body, but at half the cost with the 1D MkIIn.

[AeroSmith]

i have seen nothing but stellar results out of the 5D. Weathersealing would be nice to have, especially having all weather-sealed lenses, but I can live without it for a while.

Man, you are right, the 5D is an incredible camera. I have taken some photographs in low light that would not have been possible with any other camera.

I just printed (well, SmugMug printed them for me) out a couple of 8"x12" portraits shot at 1600 with the 5D and the results were stunning. Very rich colors and no noise at all evident in the prints.

[sboerup]

Remeber, megapixels isn't everything. You can get stunning prints from a 10D, even at 16x20. 1DsII is a great camera, don't wait for the upgrade because it's coming. I'd only wait to buy the 1DsII because the prices will drop and I think you'll see more on the used boards since those users will want the new update.

[Pell]

a good camera today will take a good picture tomorrow regardless of new techonologies.