-=1DS Mark II Admirers, congregate!

Old tech vs. new tech. -- Live View, Dust Delete, larger screen, larger files, weather sealed hotshoe, 1080p video, Digic IV, etc.

I, and a bunch of others, switched from a 5D to a 1Ds2, and I can't say that I regret it. A larger screen would be nice, but, I usually just carry my Epson P3000 with me to shoots if people really want to see the pictures. The two button menu change function takes a few days to get used to, but, nothing crazy. All in all, yes, it is a bigger brother to the 5D classic.

Darkwand wrote in post #10181311
A used 1Ds mark II is just south of a 7D in cost here in Sweden.
Full frame would be awfully nice, and other perks like f/8 auto-focus.

What features would i miss out of compared to a 7D or say a 5D2? In my mind the 1D mark II seems like a bigger brother to the 5D classic, it seems like a good compromise to buy a used 1D mk2 (or consider it).

You need to live without Live vue, a very small and inferior LCD, no microfocus adjustment. What you get is a body that you could drive nails with ( in the rain ), fabulous autofocus and metering and that gorgeous FF image quality.

I don't care much for live view the 1D series has a display on top like i want to have. No Dust delete is annoying but manageable video is irrelevant (got a t1i backup) weather sealed hot-shoe would be nice since i have the 580EX II but not a deal-breaker.

What i really really want on a new camera just seem to be in the 1Ds mk2, it's a compromise but it looks like a very good compromise considering the featurs i want.

I've been going back and forth between the 7D and the 5D2 (which i can't really afford) as one is full frame and the other has better auto-focus, this has both but lacks dust removal and micro-adjustment but those aren't as important.

I think i have a new front runner when i get my tax return. I got a feeling my 85mm f/1.8 (my favorite) is perfect for this

^^I dunno what I'd do without the 85mm. Love it.

inthedeck wrote in post #10181770
^^I dunno what I'd do without the 85mm.

Swearing over slow AF

I'll still keep the 85L II, it's my go to lens even though focus is slow...that's how much I like it. The lens feels faster to focus on the 1Ds2 vs. the 5D. Dunno why...it just does.

Darkwand wrote in post #10181525
I don't care much for live view the 1D series has a display on top like i want to have. No Dust delete is annoying but manageable video is irrelevant (got a t1i backup) weather sealed hot-shoe would be nice since i have the 580EX II but not a deal-breaker.

What i really really want on a new camera just seem to be in the 1Ds mk2, it's a compromise but it looks like a very good compromise considering the featurs i want.

I've been going back and forth between the 7D and the 5D2 (which i can't really afford) as one is full frame and the other has better auto-focus, this has both but lacks dust removal and micro-adjustment but those aren't as important.

I think i have a new front runner when i get my tax return. I got a feeling my 85mm f/1.8 (my favorite) is perfect for this

You are right, every camera will have advantages and disadvantages over the other. Just list the features you need sorted by priority and I think you will find your answer. That is what I did when I chose the 1ds2 over the 5d2 and 1d3.

Images seem to be 12-bit with this camera, how much of a difference is that compared to 14-bit?
Especially in the equation Full frame 12-bit vs 1.6 crop 14-bit.

Darkwand wrote in post #10182437
Images seem to be 12-bit with this camera, how much of a difference is that compared to 14-bit?
Especially in the equation Full frame 12-bit vs 1.6 crop 14-bit.

I'm not sure on the math of all that but I think it equates out to the camera being able to take in a thinner gambit of colors in its raw form but I believe once you process it in Photoshop, the gambit is widened to expose the missing in-between tones.

Obviously, shooting in 14 bit would be nicer and that is one of the things that draw me to the Mk III version of this camera though I'm waiting for the used prices to come down a whole bunch more before I make the switch.

Cheers!

Through google-fu I've deduced the 12-bit makes it harder to bring out detail from underexposed areas as not enough gradient detail is stored.
This would be an unwelcome drawback but considering the good ISO handling and full frame it's the most annoying drawback I've found so far but I could live with it. One can't really see the difference in a correctly exposed photo anyway.

Darkwand wrote in post #10182600
Through google-fu I've deduced the 12-bit makes it harder to bring out detail from underexposed areas as not enough gradient detail is stored.
This would be an unwelcome drawback but considering the good ISO handling and full frame it's the most annoying drawback I've found so far but I could live with it. One can't really see the difference in a correctly exposed photo anyway.

Due to the wide dynamic range of certain scenes, you will have to bring up the shadows in post even with a correctly exposed shot.

Darkwand wrote in post #10182600
Through google-fu I've deduced the 12-bit makes it harder to bring out detail from underexposed areas as not enough gradient detail is stored.
This would be an unwelcome drawback but considering the good ISO handling and full frame it's the most annoying drawback I've found so far but I could live with it. One can't really see the difference in a correctly exposed photo anyway.

Harder perhaps but not impossible.

As an example, tonight's sunset off my balcony.

First the raw, out of the camera shot...

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER. Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries. Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page. http://i66.photobucket​.com …efontmeister/VV​4G9886.jpg

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER. Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries. Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page. http://i66.photobucket​.com …meister/VV4G988​6small.jpg

The Ghost of FM wrote in post #10182810
Harder perhaps but not impossible.

As an example, tonight's sunset off my balcony.

First the raw, out of the camera shot...

And the processed shot with ACR.5.4 to pull up the shadows.

There's a whole bunch of usable detail there that can be pulled out without much issue.


Cheers!

Nice! Mind running us through how you managed to pull up those shadow details? I'm new to ACR and mostly use LR for RAW editing. Thanks.

Luminodio wrote in post #10182838
Nice! Mind running us through how you managed to pull up those shadow details? I'm new to ACR and mostly use LR for RAW editing. Thanks.

Thanks!

There's an exposure brush in LR-2 and PS CS-4 ACR. 5.0 and above that allows you to pick a brush size, amount of exposure change, up or down and then you paint over the areas you wish to change the exposure levels of. In effect, it gives you a really fast way of creating HDR like shots with a single exposure.

But the key to it is to have a good raw file to work with that's exposed correctly in the first place so that you can cleanly pull thing up or down.

Cheers!

The Ghost of FM wrote in post #10182870
Thanks!

There's an exposure brush in LR-2 and PS CS-4 ACR. 5.0 and above that allows you to pick a brush size, amount of exposure change, up or down and then you paint over the areas you wish to change the exposure levels of. In effect, it gives you a really fast way of creating HDR like shots with a single exposure.

But the key to it is to have a good raw file to work with that's exposed correctly in the first place so that you can cleanly pull thing up or down.

Cheers!

Been using LR 1 for the last three years and just recently got LR 2 and I had never knew about the exposure brush in either program. This is a tool that I thought was a pipe dream and never thought I'd see it come to fruition, let alone experiment with it. This is great to hear and only fuels me my urge to trigger a shutter.

I think I'm picking up a 24mm 1.4L II and 50mm 1.2L soon...very soon.