Canon 1D Mark 1 vs. Canon 20D

Alright, tax returns are going to be coming and i am going to sell my d60 and buy either a 20d or a 1d the first one thats only 4.2 megapixels. I primarily shoot sports for a newspaper and i was wondering what you guys would suggest I go for. The 8 frames sounds like it would be nice but so would the 8 megapixels.......

Shooting for newsprint? Go for the 1D. 4.2 MP will be plenty for that, and you'll get the performance and ruggedness you want to make sure it keeps going while you're on assignment.

That 1D is really big. The 20D is so much lighter. Try them both. That 1D is a nice camera. Almost didn't want to hand it back to Rick.

SuzyView

thanks, i cant wait to get a new body i have been waiting a long time now! and i just need my tax returns!

i heard some stuff about the grip on the 20D always breaking?

I've heard that, but only from one person.

SuzyView - I don't have a grip, don't need it right now.

I believe the grip issue has been solved, just by a new one. Never had a problem with mine.

It has. Buying new would assure you get one that properly works.

how does the iso performance compare between the two cameras? anybody know? I saw a thread with some samples a while ago but i cant find it anywhere

20D will win the battle. Different generations, so that's why you'll get the lesser ISO performance by the 1D. Howerver on print(newspaper print), noise isn't as big a deal, at least in my experiences.

This one?

http://www.photography​-on-the.net …ight=eos+1d+noi​se+samples

---- Gavin

The words "sports" and "newspaper" in the same sentence spell 1D to me. High frame rate and superior AF will easily outweigh the extra pixels.

The 20D grip problems may, or may not, have been resolved. Canon never (officially) addressed the problem a number of people have reported where the grip lost electrical contact with the camera, causing lockups. Some members here have sent theirs back up to 5 times and still have the problem; others have never experienced it. There are also sporadic reports of "post-fix" grips still showing false low-battery warnings (which was the officially acknowledged problem), so that may still be an issue. I got one of the first grips but stopped using it because of the false low-battery warnings. It's been back for the service, but I just totally got out of the habit and never use it anyhow.

As I said above I really think that, even used, a 1D will be a better camera for press work than a 20D. It's got weather sealing and a higher frame rate, both of which will be helpful for someone who doesn't have a choice about being out shooting. It's also more rugged generally, and you'll appreciate that, especially over time.

Last night I was at an event and during the non-shooting part of the evening I had my 1D sitting on a bench next to me. I truly marvelled at it as I sat there. It is an amazing piece of precision equipment. It just does what you ask it with no fuss or muss.

Given that you are going to be shooting sports for print media I think the 1D would be the superior piece of equipment. It has the speed, and the amazing autofocus you're going to need. The 4.2MP will be no limit in a news paper setting. Personally for that usage I think it's superior to the Mark II or the 20D because the files are smaller, will take up less space, and are quicker to process if you shoot RAW.

Take care,

Mark

1D, no doubt about it.