60D vs 1DmkII N

I've been shooting with my 60D for a while now, which I initially bought because I liked the combination of video performance (first) and still performance (second.) As time has gone on, I've realized that I shoot sports/action stills far more often than video.

So I'm thinking about looking for a 1D2n as a primary sports body, and relegate my 60D to wide focal length duties. I've been looking at the old reviews and I'm a little torn on whether or not it will be a camera I can use as much as I want to because of ISO limits. I love the burst speed and the higher buffer size of the 1DIIn, but I don't like how expanded ISO only goes to 3200. With my 60D, my complaints are with the inconsistent AF in low light, lack of auto-focus points and high ISO noise. I regularly find myself shooting sports under artificial light, both indoors and outdoors. The FPS and buffer on the 60D are just barely adequate for what I'm doing, and I would love to see an improvement in those two features.

Will a 1D series camera with a larger sensor offer greater usability at 3200 ISO than my 60D will at 6400 ISO? Sometimes I'm forced to underexpose at 6400 ISO on my 60D and the resulting images are typically awful after pushing the RAW file in PP. This has been forcing me to lower my shutter speed which is introducing unwanted blur.

If it helps, I'm already shooting relatively fast glass wide open. I've primarily been using a 70-200 f2.8L (non-IS) as well as a 50 f1.8. I could switch to faster primes, but I prefer to follow the action on a field, and that could become difficult with a fixed focal length.


Anybody here with experience handling both cameras in bad light?

thcomb wrote in post #16092839
I've been shooting with my 60D for a while now, which I initially bought because I liked the combination of video performance (first) and still performance (second.) As time has gone on, I've realized that I shoot sports/action stills far more often than video.

So I'm thinking about looking for a 1D2n as a primary sports body, and relegate my 60D to wide focal length duties. I've been looking at the old reviews and I'm a little torn on whether or not it will be a camera I can use as much as I want to because of ISO limits. I love the burst speed and the higher buffer size of the 1DIIn, but I don't like how expanded ISO only goes to 3200. With my 60D, my complaints are with the inconsistent AF in low light, lack of auto-focus points and high ISO noise. I regularly find myself shooting sports under artificial light, both indoors and outdoors. The FPS and buffer on the 60D are just barely adequate for what I'm doing, and I would love to see an improvement in those two features.

Will a 1D series camera with a larger sensor offer greater usability at 3200 ISO than my 60D will at 6400 ISO? Sometimes I'm forced to underexpose at 6400 ISO on my 60D and the resulting images are typically awful after pushing the RAW file in PP. This has been forcing me to lower my shutter speed which is introducing unwanted blur.

If it helps, I'm already shooting relatively fast glass wide open. I've primarily been using a 70-200 f2.8L (non-IS) as well as a 50 f1.8. I could switch to faster primes, but I prefer to follow the action on a field, and that could become difficult with a fixed focal length.


Anybody here with experience handling both cameras in bad light?

You're unspecific about what type of sports you shoot, but the 50 1.8 will never give you the consistently fast AF you'll get from either an 85 1.8 or 100 f2. For indoor sports, the 70-200 2.8 just won't get you what you want with the 60D.

The 1Dii or 1Diin will be really nice in better gyms or under better field lights, but to get the kind of improvement you want you may need to step up to a 1Diii. I'm just not sure how much if an improvement you will see at 3200, but the FPS and AF will be real nice.

Thanks for your input!

So far I've been shooting softball, ice hockey, indoor soccer and I will soon start shooting baseball, sand volleyball, and basketball. I pretty much jump at the chance to try shooting something new or in a new venue.

You confirmed my fear with a 1Dii in that the ISO range would be too restrictive. The mark iii expands to 6400 but is it actually usable out that far? I imagine that is the "H" setting, implying Canon doesn't recommend it.

Sell the 60d to help fund a clean 1dmkIII, that might be a better route for you

thcomb wrote in post #16093925
Thanks for your input!

So far I've been shooting softball, ice hockey, indoor soccer and I will soon start shooting baseball, sand volleyball, and basketball. I pretty much jump at the chance to try shooting something new or in a new venue.

You confirmed my fear with a 1Dii in that the ISO range would be too restrictive. The mark iii expands to 6400 but is it actually usable out that far? I imagine that is the "H" setting, implying Canon doesn't recommend it.

The 7D is said to be a 1D3 in a crop body in a lot of ways, and each body has loyal backers to tell you why their camera is better than the other. My gut says that the 1D3 will give you cleaner files shooting RAW indoors, but you may miss the 7D/60D's reach and MP shooting field sports.

I don't think there is a bad choice between the two, just preferences. There is a forum poster named Team Speed who shoots a lot of NBA D-League with his 7D as high as 12800 with very usable to good results. He has written extensively about how to get the most out of the 7D at high ISO by using DPP and very specific PP techniques.

I would give his images and posts a look before deciding on a body, you may want to grab a used 7D for $800 after checking him out and following his playbook.

I had 1dmk2. Indoor sports I will take 1dmk3. Even 7d for better higher ISO performance. Outdoors sports no issues with 1dmk2/N.

Thanks for the advice everybody. I think I'm going to try to make do until the new Gen of cameras is out. Hopefully, a 7D2 will be announced and the prices of the older bodies will drop.