Looking at FF - used 5DII or used 1DsII and why?

Original 5D had a lighter AA filter and larger pixels than 5DII or 1DsII. The files had a different look. I really prefer the original "look" versus the new one....except the new 5DmkII generates way better colors. Their updated 14bit processing makes a visible difference in color capture and gradients.

It actually took me a couple months of shooting with the 5DmkII to warm up to is file rendering. There is detail for days, and you can really really work the RAW files well...but it had a different look. I'm used to it now. I have used the 1 series cameras and I still prefer the 5D cameras.

I have dropped my cameras, had them brown from dirt and dust, gotten them soaked in rain and waves, and never had an issue. (this includes the original 5D too) Just because they aren't "1 series" bodies doesn't mean they aren't field capable. No need to baby them.

Even after having used 1 Series cameras side by side with mine (inlcuding the 1Dv) I have never felt autofocus lacking. It has never let me down, and I have never felt that I needed "more" focus power. Center focus point and fast lenses make a difference however.

After using 1ds2 it was even more frustrating to use 5d2 outer focus points. I bought a second hand 1ds2 to complement 5d2's weaknesses in AF. It was much better than I expected and it might have become my primary camera. Unfortunately the camera had several issues that I don't think are typical for 1ds and I got my money back.

I've never been so satisfied with any camera. LCD is poor but that doesn't affect the images.

The most notable difference is going to be the AF system. If you need to use outer focus points or track moving subjects then the 1dsii is a better choice. IQ differences are fairly marginal so I wouldn't bother to focus on the minute differences. But if you do a lot of landscape and macro work then live view can be helpful. And if you ever need video then it isn't even a contest. You know what the major differences are so choose whichever best suits your style of shooting.

Has anybody any side by side shots with the two camers?People always comment on image quality between the two but I never see corroborating images.

The image quality at the level of those two cameras is a matter of personal preference than deciding which is better IMHO....

Heck.... On a broad daylight, I much prefer the image quality of my Kodak SLR/c over those cameras...

As much as I love 1 series bodies I would have to go with the 5d in this case.

Thanks everyone for your insights - it has been helpful to hear from people who have used the two bodies. If anyone else has anything to add, please feel free.

I have the same problem on deciding which one to have 5D 2 or 1Ds 2.
It looks like both of them have their own pros and cons.

5D 2:
good: new electronic, high IQ, light weight, 14bits, high ISO performence
bad: auto focus, trig-lag, and mirror black out time.

1Ds 2:
good: pro build, very good auto focus (more keeper), short trig-lag and
mirror black-out time.
bad: old electronics, 12bits, usable ISO to 1600 only.

I had a 40D and felt its auto focus cannot keep up in some situations. and
I have read somewhere that 5D 2's auto-focus is in par with 40D. I have
a friend who has a nikon D700, the auto-focus of D700 is so good it almost
always in focus. So I think that my next camera has to have a good
auto focus. If 5D 2 has the same auto focus as 7D, things will be much
easier.

I really don't care about resolution, even 40D is enough for me.

I saw a lot of people had both and finally end up with 1Ds 2.
So maybe, I should go with 1Ds 2. Any suggestion?

wait a moment, this thread is entitled "looking at FF"...5D is FF, however, isn't the 1ds a crop body (1.3)?

oyster_photos wrote in post #11711738
wait a moment, this thread is entitled "looking at FF"...5D is FF, however, isn't the 1ds a crop body (1.3)?

1Ds and 1Ds 2 are full frame cameras