Which Has Better Picture Quality Than 1D Mark II N - 1DS Mark II or 5D?

[Rolex888]

I know from reading through all the posts the 5D is a real winner with low light performance & also with low noise. But out of the camera and without any post processing, which camera produces better and sharper images?

I'm currently shooting with a 1D Mark II N mostly with the 24-70 2.8L but compared to all the other images I've seen from other 5D users, it looks like my pictures can't really keep up with the high quality from the 5D unless I do a lot of Photoshop work afterwards. I'm debating on switching over to a 5D or a 1DS MKII.

For you people that already shoot with the 1DMKIIN, do you know how your pictures compare against shots taken with the 5D?

I only shoot as a hobby, but I'm just looking for the best picture quality from the hardware without having to do a whole lot of post-processing. Any thoughts?

[Tee Why]

I'd say it's same if not very very similar. The 1DMIIN and the 5D have the same pixel density and same digic II processing, so in theory, the image quality should be the same, especially if shot in RAW.

[Tareq]

if we don't talk about low light and noise then 5D has higher resolution than 1D MKIIN, but ofcourse 1Ds MKII got the highest resolution than all, and i heard even 1Dsmk2 get better details, so if you look for highest resolution then get 1Dsmk2, if you care of noise and low light then 5D serve you very well.

[willg]

many say that the 5d produces better images right from the camera. I usually use raw, but when I don't, I am impressed with the results

[wcl4]

1Ds II > 1D II

Even though pixel densities are the same, different algorithms to process info. Don't know where the 5D falls into the equation, but it would be hard to imagine a $7000 msrp body wouldn't be at least equal if not better than a $3800 msrp 5D.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ra-Review.aspx

Check out the red rose.

[Az2Africa]

I'll try to find the article I saw recently in one of the photo mags. In a test where editors, pros and judges looked only at the photos taken by the top Canon, Nikon, Fuji etc. cameras without knowing which camera took each photo, the 5D came out on top and the 1D2 was in last place. This was for portrait and landscapes and strictly their subjective opinion of the photos themsevles. No measurebating involved.

[Lostboy77]

Originally Posted by Az2Africa

I'll try to find the article I saw recently in one of the photo mags. In a test where editors, pros and judges looked only at the photos taken by the top Canon, Nikon, Fuji etc. cameras without knowing which camera took each photo, the 5D came out on top and the 1D2 was in last place. This was for portrait and landscapes and strictly their subjective opinion of the photos themsevles. No measurebating involved.

This is the kind of compairson that seems to make the most sense to me. All this stuff about which one is techniclly better takes second place to the overall look of the end result.

[tomhide]

Originally Posted by Az2Africa

I'll try to find the article I saw recently in one of the photo mags. In a test where editors, pros and judges looked only at the photos taken by the top Canon, Nikon, Fuji etc. cameras without knowing which camera took each photo, the 5D came out on top and the 1D2 was in last place. This was for portrait and landscapes and strictly their subjective opinion of the photos themsevles. No measurebating involved.

I would also love to see this sort to comparisons done by pros. As much as I want a 1Ds MKII for the reason that I want a finest image quality from a DSLR, I've seen more "WOW" factor landscape and portrait photos coming from 5D than the 1Ds MKII...
It might be due to the reason that places I search for sample images have more 5D users than 1Ds MKII users, or 1Ds MkII users are maily pros that they don't bother posting their best photos on such sites and their work are used for commercials uses instead. I don't know.

[Tareq]

In fact i many use 1Dsmk2 for studio works or commercials more than landscape, and because 1Dsmk2 is expensive then for sure few or less people using it over 1Dsmk2.
Anyway, 5D or 1Dsmk2 both cameras are capable to produce great 'WOW' factor photos, and i tested both in real world and i can't see that one camera are much better over the other unless many people are prefering one camera even it is not the best top [5D].

[John T]

Unless you are planning massive blow-ups, its the LENS that makes ther difference!

[PhotoART]

Originally Posted by Lostboy77

This is the kind of compairson that seems to make the most sense to me. All this stuff about which one is techniclly better takes second place to the overall look of the end result.

I agree wholeheartedly!

[Tandem]

Even though the pixel density is the same the 5D and the 1D Mk IIn are two different cameras for two different purposes. You can use either camera in place of the other but basically the 5D is a portrait camera and the 1D Mk IIn is a sports camera.

If you have time to set up the shot the 5D gives a little better quality photos. If you are in a hurry (i.e. sports action) the 1D Mk IIn has a much better chance of actually getting the shot. What good does the beauty of the 5D photo do you if you miss the shot by a hair?

If you want to play in the rain, you better leave the 5D at home.

I haven't used the 1Ds series so I can't make a comparison.