1D X Mark II Owners Unite! Discuss & Post Photos

rejay14 wrote in post #18891610
I think that this is getting a bit out of control about what I stated: I did mean that I didn't see a noticeable difference between the images of the two bodies in MOST of my shooting situations. There have been many comments about the frame rate and quick acquisition of the 1DXII-I agree. This is a huge difference between the two bodies.

Another big difference is the incorporated wireless and "touch-screen-to-capture-above-the-head-shots" of the 5DIV. They are very different bodies, with different strengths, I was only trying to submit the notion that either would be my last camera on a desert island. With wi-fi. And power. And Profoto strobes. And the models from the last 5 issues of SI Swimsuit....I guess I'll just top there and hope that my point was clarified

In reading back over your original post, and now this, I'm now more confused about what you're asking You wanted us to reply with any differences we saw b/w the cameras, and then it was re-qualified in this latest post to compare only IQ. And then in your last paragraph, you go on to compare non-IQ features. I don't know what to say anymore, except your last statement is golden

umphotography wrote in post #18890580
I Bring C stands to every wedding. And I can get them up to 10 Ft. I think i was about 8-9 ft for these shots.

I sold off my 70-200F/2.8. Too big and too heavy to use all day at a wedding. If I had a do over, I would get the Sigma 105 1.4. Its the best of both worlds BT the 85mm and 135MM and it has great bokeh like the 200 f/2.0.....I have been lusting for one but with a 135mm and an 85 art in the bag it just wasted $$ for me. 135MM does such a great job. I highly recommend for portrait work. If you get a little closer and it just blows the background to pieces. I still use it a ton

2nd body is a 5D4

here are close up 135L shots- these just have a preset applied. So the 135L i have is 12 yrs old. No need to rush off to get the 105 for me

Hosted photo: posted by umphotography in
./showthread.php?p=188​90580&i=i136458926
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by umphotography in
./showthread.php?p=188​90580&i=i147551483
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Have to agree the 135L is an amazing lens, and one id never consider selling.

dexy101 wrote in post #18891819
Have to agree the 135L is an amazing lens, and one id never consider selling.

I've been probing for more feedback on several threads for the Sigma 105mm lately, with little response. I know it takes good images, but samples I've seen indicate the 105mm is not truly better for bokeh .. just different. Given easy weight, build quality and price, the 135mm from Canon seems one of the best values available.

David Stallard wrote in post #18889456
Hi Richard,

Not sure if that particular 2 seater is original (guessing it is) they had a few buit for high level recognisance I believe - camera man in the rear seat. They now use it for passenger flights out of Biggin Hill air strip - NOT a cheap treat!!

.DAVID.

graham121 wrote in post #18889762
I can chime in with a bit of history about that particular two seat spitfire.

ML407 is currently painted with invasion stripes to commemorate the 75th anniversary of D-Day, this was originally a Mk IX single seater built at Castle Bromwich in 1944 and flown operationally by a number of units including 485(NZ) Squadron.

It was one of about 15 Mk IX's that were converted post WWII by Supermarine or Vickers Armstrong to become T Mk IX's - later known as TR9's - and this one served as a trainer with the Irish Air Corps.

Known as the 'Grace Spitfire, more details of ML407 can be found here https://www.warbirdfli​ghts.co.uk/spitfireml4​07

Hope that helps.

Thanks David and Graham.
Fascinating history. Thanks for link.
Interesting how they modify those planes and turn them to other uses etc.
(apologies, late response. Got a bit lost on this forum!)

San Diego Safari Park

A little sports action

San Diego Zoo Safari Park

Bkop wrote in post #18903385
=Bkopperl;18903385]San Diego Zoo Safari Park

Hosted photo: posted by Bkopperl in
./showthread.php?p=189​03385&i=i172891857
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Bkopperl in
./showthread.php?p=189​03385&i=i190372208
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Nice job of photographing that ol' boy. I notice you chose to shoot him at a fairly high ISO. They surely came out clean looking.

Photographically speaking, I think the best thing I've ever done is save up for the 1DXII. High ISO does not phase it. I bumped the ISO up due to
1. extremely variable cloud cover that day. Just an hour earlier it was completely overcast.
2. I took these photos from a moving caravan truck. A lot of bumping and vibrating going on. Though the IS on the lens helped.
Glad you liked the photos.

It's been fun, but my tenure as a 1DX2 has come to an end I love every single thing about the camera, absolutely no reservations whatsover, aside from the weight... Being out in the field all day w/ the 1DX2+600 f/4III+1.4 hanging off of my shoulder was do-able, but I just found another setup that gets me the shots I want but without the cumbersome weight/bulk. And with how I do things, anything that isn't going to be used enough to justify the space in my bag goes to another photographer who will put it to better use. It's a sad day, this was my last Canon DSLR.

I realize no one will actually care, but thought I'd share anyway. Here are the last images I made w/ the glorious beast:

Photo from MatthewK's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (990225)

Photo from MatthewK's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (990504)

Well MathewK, two things:

1. Where is the last image, and
2. What system have you switched to?

Naturalist wrote in post #18903734
Well MathewK, two things:

1. Where is the last image, and
2. What system have you switched to?

1) weird, the forum seems to have had a hiccup as of late, some lens/camera labels are missing, and the pics didn't get added to my gallery. Had to pop over to where I posted them and add them quick, and now they're here

2) Nikon D500 + 500 f/5.6PF. It's insanely small and light, w/ nearly-1DX2 level of AF, great IQ right out of camera. A few sacrifices had to be made:

- 14 FPS down to 10FPS
- 1DX2 has crazy low noise at high ISO, a stop better at least.
- FOV... it's a 500mm lens on a crop body, which is a 750mm perceived FOV, but still 500mm. Whereas, the 1DX2+600+1.4 is a true 840mm. Most noticeable drawback: less background blur, and separation of subject from background
- overall reach potential w/ AF: 1200mm vs. 1000mm (well technically 700mm, but 1000mm FOV). This one isn't as big to me, since I rarely shoot at these distances

The 1DX2+600 combo was practically point-and-shoot, whereas now I need to be more cognizant of my surroundings and setup in order to get the same level of shot (which is actually a good thing in the long run). Notably for birding, I have to angle the perch as such that there aren't any distracting branches or sky holes in the background, and I just plain need to get closer to them.

A few weeks back (on the 4th of July, actually) I was stalking through a sunflower field after Indigo Buntings. Bugs and sun+heat+humidity and itchy plants, and the process of maneuvering the 1DX2+600 through the sunflowers stalks/leaves was just smoking my arms. I switched over to the D500PF, and it was a breath of fresh air: no fatigue, super easy to swing into position, easy to hold the camera at eye level waiting for the Buntings to land. Most importantly though, I ended up loving the shots from the Nikon kit more than the Canon. I'd been shooting both systems side-by-side for a few weeks, but it was then and there that I decided I didn't need the huge body/glass in order to get shots that I enjoyed.

In the end, while the 1DX2 is probably the best camera I've ever used, I don't think that how/what I'm shooting actually requires that much camera, and I can afford to take a step down in cost/weight/features and still end up getting photos that I am absolutely happy with.

MatthewK wrote in post #18903741
1) weird, the forum seems to have had a hiccup as of late, some lens/camera labels are missing, and the pics didn't get added to my gallery. Had to pop over to where I posted them and add them quick, and now they're here

2) Nikon D500 + 500 f/5.6PF. It's insanely small and light, w/ nearly-1DX2 level of AF, great IQ right out of camera. A few sacrifices had to be made:

- 14 FPS down to 10FPS
- 1DX2 has crazy low noise at high ISO, a stop better at least.
- FOV... it's a 500mm lens on a crop body, which is a 750mm perceived FOV, but still 500mm. Whereas, the 1DX2+600+1.4 is a true 840mm. Most noticeable drawback: less background blur, and separation of subject from background
- overall reach potential w/ AF: 1200mm vs. 1000mm (well technically 700mm, but 1000mm FOV). This one isn't as big to me, since I rarely shoot at these distances

The 1DX2+600 combo was practically point-and-shoot, whereas now I need to be more cognizant of my surroundings and setup in order to get the same level of shot (which is actually a good thing in the long run). Notably for birding, I have to angle the perch as such that there aren't any distracting branches or sky holes in the background, and I just plain need to get closer to them.

A few weeks back (on the 4th of July, actually) I was stalking through a sunflower field after Indigo buntings. Bugs and sun+heat+humidity and itchy plants, and the process of maneuvering the 1DX2+600 through the sunflowers stalks/leaves was just smoking my arms. I switched over to the D500PF, and it was a breath of fresh air: no fatigue, super easy to swing into position, easy to hold the camera at eye level waiting for the Buntings to land. Most importantly though, I ended up loving the shots from the Nikon kit more than the Canon. I'd been shooting both systems side-by-side for a few weeks, but it was then and there that I decided I didn't need the huge body/glass in order to get shots that I enjoyed.

In the end, while the 1DX2 is probably the best camera I've ever used, I don't think that how/what I'm shooting actually requires that much camera, and I can afford to take a step down in cost/weight/features and still end up getting photos that I am absolutely happy with.

How big of a hit are you going to have to take to sell it ??

I have tried to sell a few things and man nothing is moving and low ball offers are everywhere

umphotography wrote in post #18903846
How big of a hit are you going to have to take to sell it ??

I have tried to sell a few things and man nothing is moving and low ball offers are everywhere

I was lucky with my 1DX2, and was able to sell for close to what I was asking, but it took 2 weeks to find a buyer. Since I originally got it at a super price, the loss wasn't all that bad, but if I had recently bought new at full list, I definitely would have been a bath on the sale.

Yeah, the market is so depressed right now because Canon is still in this EF to R transition, and everyone is waiting with baited-breath to see what (if any) giant technological leap Canon will make in sensor design as well as their next "Pro R" MILC. It's getting harder and harder to move big ticket items, stuff is sitting stagnant and people have to keep lowering prices to sell, and it's starting not to make sense to part with certain gear because you'll lose so much money. People have to be very certain that what they're buying is what they need, because that safety net of good resale is gone.

It's like musical chairs, and the music has stopped.. what gear you have now, might just be best to keep it.