New (to me) 1Ds

Hey all. I've been using a T4i for a while now and I wanted to grab a full frame to play around with. I found a 1Ds on Craigslist for $400 and went to snatch it up. I figured it would be beatup and towards the end of its usable life but I grabbed it anyways. Upon inspection, it seems to be in great condition. Then I checked the shutter count. 25,468! It's barely broken in!

So... any advice for me going from the T4i to the 1Ds? I know they are very different.

Did I pay the right amount? Is there anything I need to do or look out for with this new camera?

Thanks!

The screen sucks, the controls can be a pain, the battery is rubbish, it's heavy......BUT it produces very nice files!!!

I had one before getting my 1DS2 and I loved it, apart from the screen which was my only main grumble.

I treated it as a film camera and didn't bother with the screen too much!

What lenses will you be using with it?

I'm not a chimper so I don't really care about the screen. I will have to slow down and be more thoughtful about composure than I am with my T4i, but that I think will make me a better photographer.

At the moment the only two lenses I own that will work with it are my 50mm 1.8 and 40mm 2.8. I'll probably stick with the 50mm for now until I can afford some L glass. I'd like the 17-40L. It'll be mainly for studio shooting. I heard it's pretty much useless over ISO 400 or so, so I'll stick with studio lighting and keep to the T4i for outdoor or low light stuff.

Great camera that still takes great pictures. Good glass is critical with the FF Canon bodies.

schmoelzel wrote in post #16221561
Great camera that still takes great pictures. Good glass is critical with the FF Canon bodies.

Yup, I'm saving for the good glass. Trying to get the hang of this camera in the meantime.

Will I get better images out of it than my T4i?

bugler wrote in post #16221769
Yup, I'm saving for the good glass. Trying to get the hang of this camera in the meantime.

Will I get better images out of it than my T4i?

I think so but I am biased!! I currently shoot with an old 1DsII and think it's fantastic. I have prints in my shop that are 6 ft by 4 ft and they look fantastic. I think any of the 1-series pro bodies are still good and relevant, even my 1D!

Great to hear! Any suggestions on the first lens I should consider? Don't suggest some crazy $2300 lens. Under a grand for my first one would be great haha. Again, mostly studio/portrait stuff.

The 70-200 F/4L is a hard all-rounder to beat,,, Best Buy, B&H and Adorama are all selling them for $630 right now,,, a good used copy will set you back $500,,, might as well spring for a new one.

The 85mm 1.8 & 50mm 1.4 are both old designs but still very capable studio lenses,,, can both be picked up used for around $300.

Oops! I almost just bought a 50mm 1.4 FD lens haha. I'll have to pick one of them up. I think 85mm will not be wide enough for what I like. Not sure if I need a zoom lens like the 70-200 but I'll look into that. How do you like your 50mm 1.2?

I'd also like something wide like a 17-40. How's the f/4L?

bugler wrote in post #16222216
Oops! I almost just bought a 50mm 1.4 FD lens haha. I'll have to pick one of them up. I think 85mm will not be wide enough for what I like. Not sure if I need a zoom lens like the 70-200 but I'll look into that. How do you like your 50mm 1.2?

I'd also like something wide like a 17-40. How's the f/4L?

The 17-40 is a great inexpensive way to get into the L glass game. Unfortunately, wide open it is pretty soft at the corners if that matters. I have a discontinued 28-70L and it is a fantastic lens. Got rid of my zooms (70-200, 17-40, 16-35) when I got that one. Sometimes they pop up used for $800 or even less. Great deal imo........

I'm not too worried about wide open. Doing mostly studio work, I'll probably stick with "optimal" aperture around f/8, so as far as soft in the corners goes, I should be able to avoid that (I hope). Would that make the 17-40 formidable? I'm seeing a few on ebay for $550-$650. Is it really usable at 17mm? Or would it be worth the extra $100 for the 28-70?

I see a few 28-70's on ebay right now for around $750. I'll look into that.

bugler wrote in post #16222261
I'm not too worried about wide open. Doing mostly studio work, I'll probably stick with "optimal" aperture around f/8, so as far as soft in the corners goes, I should be able to avoid that (I hope). Would that make the 17-40 formidable? I'm seeing a few on ebay for $550-$650. Is it really usable at 17mm? Or would it be worth the extra $100 for the 28-70?

I see a few 28-70's on ebay right now for around $750. I'll look into that.

My 28-70L blows away any other 'normal' zoom that I have owned, which is why it's still in my bag. I am partial to primes but sometimes a zoom comes in handy and their handy when one travels! I had a 17-40 for a bit but like so many others, was underwhelmed by the inconsistency from one copy to the next. Not a bad lens but I think there are better options in the sub $1000 category.

bugler wrote in post #16222216
Oops! I almost just bought a 50mm 1.4 FD

How do you like your 50mm 1.2?

I intend to be buried with it.

I guess the 17-28mm area I won't really be missing out on anything and it's worth it for the faster f/2.8. So I suppose I'll be loking for a 28-70. Thanks for that.

My buddy is gonna let me borrow his 70-200 to see if I like it.

bugler wrote in post #16222341
I guess the 17-28mm area I won't really be missing out on anything and it's worth it for the faster f/2.8. So I suppose I'll be loking for a 28-70. Thanks for that.

My buddy is gonna let me borrow his 70-200 to see if I like it.

You will