Who likes 1Ds 2 over the 1Ds 3?

Underscore wrote in post #8397950
Can you justify this? What are your specific reasons besides being able to say "hey, I have the latest out there, etc..."?

Because you won't be able to see a damn thing on that bleak, tink mkII's LCD if your out in the daylight.

I dont think its a question of like, It just makes more sense to have the 2 if you can get the money back from the 3. What did you feel was the gain with a 3 - seriously who needs 21mp. the rest of the functions are just for show anyway. Does it have sensor cleaning - I have a rocket blower... Live view? I have eyes.... come on people have been taking great shots the last decade with 3 things ISO, APERTURE AND SHUTTERSPEED..... I dont think its worth the money of all the rest. I have yet to discover asituation where i would go - damn i need a ds3... I could say that about the 5dmk2 in case of the video function....

Underscore wrote in post #8397958
You know what, I think I will close this thread. I have yet to get anyone that has the ability, or the desire to who their ability to make a decent argument either way, with possibly the comment above on the lithium battery.

For the majority of the responses, just a bunch of flap from those that evidently have trouble putting two thoughts in sequence to make a sentence communicating reasons for or against.

we're just kidding with you. chill out man.

and while you're at it, read this:

http://www.dpreview.co​m/reviews/canoneos1dsm​arkiii/

notable points:

- 14-bit RAWs
- higher mp
- ability to shoot sRAW
- more sensitive AF
- AF adjustment
- better metering
- higher life expectancy
- better LCD
- live view
- larger buffer
- more intuitive menu
- hot shoe sealing
- USB 2.0
- lithion battery

that's quite a bit of improvement, and it's easy to see how the 1dsmk3 is an upgrade. whether or not it's worth the cost is up to the photographer.

The only viable reasons I could see is the cost savings and more manageable file size which might make a lot of lesser equipped computers run a bit quicker.

As MkII owner, I'm completely happy with mine and wouldn't dream of selling it and then dropping another 5 or 6 gees to get the Mk III. Live view and a 3" screen are cool but not worth the price difference.

Cheers!

alt4852 wrote in post #8397993
we're just kidding with you. chill out man.

Two things. I don't know you and you are not in person with me for me to hear your tone, or see your demeanor.

Let's just stay on point.

alt4852 wrote in post #8397993
notable points:

- 14-bit RAWs Perhaps worth it for larger prints and color accuracy, but not significant enough for an additional $2,000
- higher mp not enough; 17mp is plenty
- ability to shoot sRAW means nothing to me
- more sensitive AF ??? - where is this stated? Oh, by the way, you can only choose 9 of the 45 points where with the 2, you can choose any of the 45 for selective focus
- AF adjustment - yeah the toggle switch is nice
- better metering - this is true, but marginal
- higher life expectancy - 200k clicks is plenty on the 2
- better LCD - better by bigger? LCD isn't a monitor is best left for histogram viewing, not critical image review
- live view - means nothing to me
- larger buffer - could be nice for sport or other rapid shooting conditions
- more intuitive menu - depends on the user
- hot shoe sealing - not an issue if you are not out in bad weather often
- USB 2.0 - not an issue if you have a card reader; tethering should be done wirelessly with Canon's system if you have to have it
- lithion battery - likely this is a bonus for the 3

See edits above.

Something not mentioned above is the fact that the Mark 2 had no Canon public advisories; but the 3 has had 3 since its release. The QC or the camera itself was a dud in many cases. I had my 3 replaced by Canon, then sold it. Just too much of a chance in my opinion, to take with family photos of events that will not repeat.

Anyway, thanks for the above response.

The Ghost of FM wrote in post #8398000
The only viable reasons I could see is the cost savings and more manageable file size which might make a lot of lesser equipped computers run a bit quicker.

As MkII owner, I'm completely happy with mine and wouldn't dream of selling it and then dropping another 5 or 6 gees to get the Mk III. Live view and a 3" screen are cool but not worth the price difference.

Cheers!

Appreciate the answer; however, your reasons seem counterintuitive for keeping the mark 2 since you only name a couple for going back to the mk 2, but you wouldn't sell it in a dream. Seems to me that you would have more than 2 reasons for going from a 3 to a 2 if you really liked your 2 that much.

Am I missing you? Do I even have a point? Just curious.

versedmb wrote in post #8397961
Because you won't be able to see a damn thing on that bleak, tink mkII's LCD if your out in the daylight.

That isn't logical. Many photographers have shot plenty of wonderful photos using a smaller LCD.

Rendition wrote in post #8394155
LOL...The only downgrade I have heard of is 1DIII to 1DIIN cuz of AI Servo issues.

Same thing would apply here, really...
( I leave it up to the readers to decide the validity of either )
Other than that, just like the 1DIII to 1DIIn every thing else is certainly a downgrade.

Underscore wrote in post #8396776
Well, think of this...

If you essentially get everything you need from the 1Ds 2 and have a used 3 that you can sell for close to the money you spent on it, then why not sell the 3 and use the recovered cash for some Ls?...

I do not see any cogent arguments so far from any of you.

Keep trying...

why are you looking for an argument, and why the attitude?

Your absolutely right and it can not be debated, if you get what you need from the 1Ds II, that's all you need to know and no one can take that from you...

Underscore wrote in post #8397958
You know what, I think I will close this thread. I have yet to get anyone that has the ability, or the desire to who their ability to make a decent argument either way, with possibly the comment above on the lithium battery.

For the majority of the responses, just a bunch of flap from those that evidently have trouble putting two thoughts in sequence to make a sentence communicating reasons for or against.

You know what, I think I will take you up on this having read more of your posts in this thread....