2nd hand 1Ds or new 1D2

[Mthorpe_Davies]

I'm going to take the plunge and I don't want to piss around getting a 20D so if you were going to buy which would you get a 2nd hand 1Ds or new 1D2.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Given the number of 1d MkII shooters on this forum (a few) Vs. the # of 1Ds shooters that stop in (not many) My guess is the MkII will be more prevelent.

I opted for a MkII.

[timmyquest]

new 1D2 for sure

[karusel]

don't want to P*** around getting a 20D

Good boy! 8)

I concur with the above posters. 1DS is strictly studio, 1DMKII is more versatile and I don't believe it might have inferior picture quality. Also, the latter is cheaper, new, and therefore certainly not abused, with zero shutterclicks.

[Mthorpe_Davies]

Anyone know where I can download a PDF brochure for the 1D2. I've looked on a couple of canon sites but can't find anything.

[timmyquest]

Have you seen this?

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/swf/flash.html

[karusel]

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/swf/flash.html

Argh... Now I MUST have one... need... clicks..... 1.3...... 8.2.... c c cc c click......

:lol:

[BearSummer]

Strictly studio... pah

The 1DS is far from being a strictly studio camera. The things to remember are

1ds-----------1dMk2
11.4 MP------8.3MP
3.3 f/sec-----8.5 f/sec
10 frames---20 frames buffer

so if you want higher frames/sec and a larger buffer (sports or fast action shooting) then go for the mk2, if you want a larger file size then go with the 1ds. It all depends on how many times you need more than 3.3 f/sec and a 10 frame buffer, if the answer is "not many" then get the 1ds.

Or of course you could wait for the 1ds Mk2....

Best regards

BearSummer

[Alexandre Gabriel]

THE thing to remember is

1ds-----------1dMk2
Full Frame---1.3 crop

You CAN use your 12-24 as a 12-24 lens :wink:
Best choice if you prfere WA

[BearSummer]

Well spotted Alexandre, totally forgot the crop factor.

best regards

BearSummer

[ssim]

You don't really say what your intended subject matter is most of the time. I can say that I have not regretted getting the 1D MKII. It is a great piece of hardware. I have made prints up to 16X20 so far and they are as good, if not better, than any film prints that I have printed over the years.

If you think that you really need the extra MP then for the the 1Ds but the 1D MKII certainly wouldn't disappoint you.

[ralee]

It seems that even Rob Galbraith(with the help of Chuck Westfall) tend to agree with AF problems with 1DS for sports

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6458-7153-7161

Quote"Given what we shoot here at Little Guy Media, however, we found all three models to give the greatest difficulty when tracking moving subjects. For the sports we cover most, including football, soccer, hockey and basketball, even the 10D coughed up way too many misfocused frames (the EOS-1Ds is also a poor performer on AI Servo).

When compared to Nikon's D100, for example, there simply is no comparison: Nikon's midrange digital SLR is capable of a much higher percentage of in-focus sports photos than the 10D (or EOS-1Ds, for that matter), given a comparable lens and comparable shooting conditions. In fact, of Canon's current and recent digital SLR models, only the EOS-1D and EOS-1D Mark II offer truly usable sports autofocus (with the latter camera offering mind-blowingly great autofocus when used with a lens like the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS or EF 300mm f/2.8L IS)."

[Persian-Rice]

The reason the 1Ds is dubbed as a "studio" camera is because of the lack of speed.

Framerate is a concern, but we also must realize that due to the very high pixel count, files are larger and take a substantially longer time to write. Servoing with the 1Ds is also slow compared to something like the MK II. I would categorize it in the area between a 10D and a 20D but below both of the 1D cameras.

I now can say I have shot with every Canon dSLR (100 frames+ on each) other then the 1Ds MK II. Unless you are a specialized photographer, the 1D MK II is still a better all round camera. The only downside is that it does not have a full frame sensor, but I personally think that 1.3 is still much better then any other thing you can compare to.

Yes with the 1Ds the 12-24 is going to be 12-24. But with the 1D the 12-24 is 15-31 which is still pretty darn good.

Cheers

[CyberDyneSystems]

Some other 1Ds drawbacks...

It has slower AF than the 1D or MkII
It has slower card write speeds thant the 1D or MkII

In both cases I don't understand why.. I would have assumed the same or better,. but this is not the case.

[Jay Todd]

Why not just wait for the 1Ds MKII? Too much $ ?

[Mthorpe_Davies]

Why not just wait for the 1Ds MKII? Too much $ ?

Becuase the wife would leave me if I spent that much money. The only reason why I'm now looking at 1Ds and 1D2 is because I won a 42 inch plasma tv in a sales promo at work which I'm going to sell and with the money get a new camera.

Before you say why sell the plasma, I have a small lounge and I already have a fantastic 32 inch Loewe planius tv which have a far better pic than any plasma I've seen.

[roanjohn]

I would probably pick the 1D MKII...........faster and newer.

.........and less noise.

Ro1

[timmyquest]

Why not just wait for the 1Ds MKII? Too much $ ?

Becuase the wife would leave me if I spent that much money. The only reason why I'm now looking at 1Ds and 1D2 is because I won a 42 inch plasma tv in a sales promo at work which I'm going to sell and with the money get a new camera.

Before you say why sell the plasma, I have a small lounge and I already have a fantastic 32 inch Loewe planius tv which have a far better pic than any plasma I've seen.

No need to defend yourself, i fantazise about winning say...a car, and all the splendid white lenses you can get out of that!

Congrats on winning that, thats pretty cool man.

What camera do you have now btw?

[Mthorpe_Davies]

An Eos 33, I also toyed with getting an Eos 1v for a while then I played with a 1D2, makes it very hard to buy a 20D when you've had a play with a 1 series body.

[ScottE]

There are two main considerations. The 1D2 is a better camera as far as features go. The 1DS has more pixels.

The only reason I would consider the 1DS would be if I was going to make a lot of prints 16 x20 inches or larger and needed to maximize resolution. The 1D2 will produce good looking prints that size, but not quite as much fine resolution because it has fewer pixels.

If you are happy with your EOS 33 I wouldn not discount the 20D so quickly. It has very close to the same capablilities. I know of one wildlife photographer who has both the 1D2 and a 20D. He often chooses to use the 20D because it is lighter and less bulky if he has to carry it any distance. He does not seem to think there is any significant difference in image quality and considers the auto focus to be almost as good. His main concern is the low number of burst shots that can be made in RAW mode.

[Mthorpe_Davies]

The reason why I'm considering the 1 series over the 20D is I'm going to be doing a considerable amout of travel over the next couple of years, if the build on the 20D is anything like as poor as the Eos 33 it's going to crap out pretty quickly.

[ScottE]

The build quality of the 20D is way better than the D60.

I've had my D60 for two and a half years and it has been on safari in the dust of Africa, bounced around in backpack in the Rocky Mountains, used in mud and rain at mountain bike races and crusted in snow while photographing ski races. No problems so far.

I would not purposely subject a 1D Mk II to anything I would not subject a 20D to. I don't think the 20D is a particularly delicate piece of equipment, but the Mk II does have better weather sealing if you use the newer L lenses.

For some uses, size and weight are more important.

In any case, for an important trip I would not go with only one camera body. In my opinion, for air travel two digital bodies are way better than one digital and one film body. Who wants to bother with film and airport Xrays?

A combination of a 1D Mk II and a 20D would be ideal.