1d MKII v 20D

[JBillings]

Seriously thinking about upgrading. Will I see a difference in the move up to the 1D? I shoot a lot of indoor sporting events using my 70-200LIS.

Any and all observations will help.

Thanks

[BurningArrow]

I'm thinking about upgrading too, but I'll wait until details come out of the new kid on the block that's supposed to come out in the fall .... not necessarilly to get the tweener but the price of the 1D MkII could come down.

[lomond]

Will you see a difference ?.....Yes.

Is it worth the upgrade from the 20D, I don't know. How serious do you take your photography. For sports photography I doubt there is a better DSLR than the 1D MKII but it costs.
I think BurningArrow has a point. Hold off till the fall. If a replacement for the 1D mkII comes out then you have a choice. Expensive but better replacement or excellent but even cheaper MKII. :)

[GyRob]

i went from the 20d to the 1dmk2 image is about the same, you get lots more custom bits but i use 3 or 4 it is quicker to use but not by a great deal .it is a LOT heavyer but it does feel great in your hand,
if your getting good shots with your 20d i would stay with it and wait to see what comes out next the diffrence between the 2 is not vast . buffer ,water proofing, 8.5fps are the main ones imho.
Rob

[lomond]

I think a big difference might be in the more accurate focus system of the 1DMKII.
On switching from the 10D to the 1D MKII i find I get a lot more keepers.
I know it's the 10D and not the 20D but I am sure the 1D MKII has a superior AF compared to the 20D.
Very important for sports and wildlife photography.

[grego]

Do you get paid for doing this? If so, sure, but if you aren't making any money off it, I don't think you need to upgrade, if costs are a concern(even if you could afford it).

[defordphoto]

Having the 20D, the 10D and the 1DMKII, here are my comments:

The 20D is a fine camera and we love ours. However, when you hold a 1D-series camera for the first time you know something is different. Yes, it is heavier, but it's also much better balanced ergonomically. Toss a E1 grip on it (we use E1 grips on ALL our cameras) and it doesn't matter if you have a 70-200 f/2.8 IS or a 50mm f/1.4 on it, it remains much better balanced that either the 10D or 20D.

After you shoot with it for a while it just becomes an extension of your arm. Shooting 8-12 hours at the track is a breeze and the hand and wrist stress is very low at the end of the day using both the E1 and the OpTech neck straps.

The speed of the 1D-series cameras blows all the prosumer cameras out of the water. Not that the 20D is slow, but the 1D is significantly faster in every operation.

And yes, AF and metering are also superior. Some would argue is it worth more than twice the price?

IMO: Oh yes. By far. No question.

[MadMesh]

20D with a battery Grip and call it a day. The 20D is such an amazing camera, I have used the Mark II1d since my uncle owns one. and to be honest with you... I rather just invest the saved $ into lenses, since optics is what drives photography.

[CyberDyneSystems]

For sports.. I'd say that's one of the best reasons to consider a 1D...

[Mohawk]

The bigger brighter viewfinder of the 1DMKII was what sold me. I would not think twice about buying the 1DMKII all over again.

Mike

[MadMesh]

Like the above said. Depends on what you do with it... Im not a person who makes a career shooting. I do it for fun, and also to maby sell a few pictures here and there. Some product photography and thats about it. Small portrait projects and such. Sports photography i would do just because the camera CAN still do it...

Again, whats the application.

also if your gona be shooing in places that might have water spray, heavy snow, rain... Then go with a MarkII1D.... with L glass, you can take a garden hose to it and still be ok.

For me.... The camera cost X2 than the 20D.... if my 20D gets wet and breaks... Ill just buy a new one. Its 1/2 the price of a 1D.

[JBillings]

The faster more accurate focus is what I'm after. I get a fair share of keepers with the 20D. But I get lots that are almost in focus. It gets distressing to have so many "almost" keepers. I think I'll think about it a while. If Canon really does come out with an updated 1D maybe I'll spring for it then.

Thanks for the comments

[SeanH]

I got a wild hair about a month ago and bought one (1Dmk2). After 3 days I took it back. Even a the highest sharpness setting the images were softer than my 20D (jpg's.....and even raw...if you can believe that). For me I want to chose to process......and not HAVE TO for every shot I take. Now if you shoot mostly raw then it's not as big of an issue. I did LOVE the big bright viewfinder, and really enjoyed shooting with it. I found I really liked some of the opitions it has over the 20D.....spot metering, 45 focus points, low & high speed drive......and many more. Honestly I didn't see that much difference in the focusing speed, and actually had more "misses" in servo than my 20D, but I'm sure that was just because I was still learning the camera. But mainly for me the lack .....or lower level of in camera processing was the breaking point. I might buy one again some day. Maybe see what happens this fall, at least this time I know what to expect. I do miss it sometimes, however the shock of getting very soft and flat images out of a $4000 dollar body was more than I could take. Looking back I think if I would have just learned to work with it I may have been happy with it, but I guess I am still at a point were I believe PS is too make a image better............not to create it.

[KennyG]

Only one comment on the difference. The sensor in the MK-II resolves more detail. Anyone who can't get good results out of the MK-II either has received a one that is faulty, or needs to understand more about digital image workflow.

[drisley]

The image quality of the 20D and 1D MKII is virtually identical. Don't let anybody tell you different. This isn't my observation, but it's what I've heard the vast majority of the time from people who own both cameras. In fact, one guy I know recently used the 20D as backup to his 1D MKII, and had some huge prints made. He could not tell which picture came from which camera. The whole thing about resolving power of the larger sensor is good in theory, but really doesn't show in real life.
Dynamic range of both cameras is also about the same. In fact, I saw a thorough comparison of dynamic range between the 20D and 1DS MKII, and the difference was just not significant, and the sensor on the 1DS MKII is even bigger than on the 1D MKII.

I recently used my 20D and 135/2L at a fitness/bodybuilding competition in a dark theatre. There was also a pro photog there with a 1DMKII and 70-200/2.8 IS.
After the competition I compared images, and the stationary shots were identical. The difference came in the fast action fitness rountines. While my images from the 20D were relatively sharp, his were out of focus and a blurry mess for the most part. And this is about as difficult a situation as you are going to find for AF on any camera... low light, and extremely fast tumbling action.
He was a pro at this too, and he still couldn't get sharp images with his 1D MKII (seems to mirror SeanH's experience above). Also, he had more blown highlights than I did. So that throws the "better metering" theory out.

What this proves is that the 20D AF is capable of keeping up with any sort of event, and that 5fps burst is often more than enough (I personally don't use "spray and pray" photography). It doesn't prove that the 1DMKII wasn't good enough, but rather that the camera is only as good as the photog behind it.

The 20D is a capable camera for almost any situation. If you can't make a shot with the 20D, then you probably won't be able to make the shot with any other camera out there at any price. After that last bb event, I have no desire to upgrade to the 1D MKII for any reason other than better build. I would rather spend the money on glass, or keep it in my pocket.

I will put my 20D to task against a 1 series camera any day. I already have in the most demanding lighting and fast action you can find, and the 20D won. :)
And the 20D is faster in atleast one spec.... startup time ;)
Then again, the 1 series cameras can take more of a beating.

[SeanH]

More food for thought.....tab down the page a bit. Foget the Nikon stuff :wink: look at the difference in the sensors comparing the 20D to the 1Dmk2.....and even the 1Ds. I will admit I don't know anything about sensors, but they must be like film in the sense that smaller grain produces a better & sharper image

Check it out

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond2x/

.....am I wrong??

[drisley]

Interesting. But I'm confused. What exactly is dot pitch on a sensor?
Is bigger better?