1Ds Mark II Digital SLR vs 20D

I've been asked to shoot a wedding. I own a 20D now with several lenses. I am thinking of buying the 1Ds Mark II thinking more expensive camera, more options, better pictures.

I'm looking for some feedback on shooting an outdoor wedding with the 20D or the Mark II. Money is not an issue and the 7,000 price for the camera doesn't bother me a bit. After lenses, etc, I expect to drop close to 20K for everything and I'm fine with that so long as the new camera knocks my socks off with better pictures.

So, what's the skinny on the 20D vs the Mark II? Can I get some good feedback on why I should or shouldn't upgrade and the pros and cons of the decision.

Also, I understand that the Mark II doesn't use focal length conversion factor-lenses but I do not understand why that is good or bad so I would like someone to explain that to me.

Thank you very much for the information.

Cliff

you're gonna drop 20k to shoot 1 wedding???

what else are you going to do with it, what else do you shoot?

there are reasons both ways to see this, and without a little more info, its really hard to give you a answer. Most people witll be twlling you to get it just out of shear jealousy, but thats not a good way of investing

To be honest, based on the questions you are asking, you are not ready for the 1DsMkII. I mean no offense here, but you are essentially asking an equivalent to what's better, a Honda Civic or a Ferrari ?

All camera's are limited by the photographer pushing the buttons. There's tons of people using the 20D to take awesome pictures. Can you honestly say right now that the 20D is holding you back? I find that most people upgrade not because their camera is limiting them, but rather because they think the upgrade will make it easier to get better pictures. I would dare say that there are more wedding photo's taken by Canon Rebel XT's & 20D/30D than Canon 1DMkII and 1DsMkII.

My suggestion would be to sink your money in lenses. The 24-70L, 70-200 2.8 IS, 35 1.4 lens are all staples in wedding photogs bags. You need fast glass to shoot weddings.

Even just 1.6x vs. FF is a huge difference. Make sure you get the right glass to accomodate. I can't imagine having to get say $10k in glass to shoot a wedding, though. Even 5k would be too much. If it's just you, then as Big Blue says, a 24-70L, 70-200L IS, and a 35L would suit you just fine. It's the "magical wedding kit". Your 20D should be more than sufficient for a wedding. At the prices they're at now, buy a backup, too.

The 1DsMkII won't automatically give you better pictures. In fact, there's a darn good chance they'll be worse if you get it shortly before a wedding and don't understand the camera inside out. It's a trick to get good with it, as it's quite different from the 20D. I held a 1DMkII, and I found it personally "harder" to use than a 20D.

If you do end up going 1DsMkII, be sure to get all the memory you can afford. At over twice the file size of the 20D, you're gonna need some room. Those RAW files can go over 20mb each. Be sure to get extra batteries, too. They're 'spensive.

16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 would be good zooms to cover the range you have. You'd also want 2 bodies. And at least 4 cards(min 1 gb) each with a laptop or storage device with you. And possibly 10 batteries(if using 2 grips-30D for example). And then some good flashes. You can do the job without jumping into the 1Ds Mark II camera and still do a quality job.

A photographer went into a diner on his way to an interview with a magazine. He brought his laptop and file folders of sample prints in and set them on the table at his booth. While enjoying his dinner, a waitress stopped by his table and started looking at the prints. "Did you take these photos?", she asked. "Why yes I did. This is my personal portfolio," he replied and began chatting about his exciting prospect with this magazine. "Wow," she responded in amazement, "what kind of camera do you have? It must be really nice." Without skipping a beat the photographer responded, "you know, this food is amazing. What kind of pans does the cook use? They must be really nice!"

Well, being a chef and photographer, the tool really does matter. as much as skill and knowledge to use the tools. well, not as much. Could a mediocre chef with top equipment rival a talented chef with a candle and foil pan, you bet. Pro's do realize the benefits to using the best tools. is giving the best tool to a rookie a substitute for a certified master chef equipped the same? No way in hell.

You can take my comment as you please. I have owned both cameras. 1Dsmk2 is AWESOME. 20D is very nice. two very different birds. this post is seemingly like trolling. Dont really know.

20D versus the 1DsMkII, money is no object?

Then the 1D, hands down.

BUT, if you don't need the extra resolution, you're throwing money away. Most wedding photos get printed at 8X10 or under, sometimes larger for the group shots. The 20D (and 30D, and 1DMkII, and Rebel XT, etc.) all have sufficient resolution to be printed at poster size. The 1Ds gains you little unless you're putting that resolution and full-frame format to work.

And as noted above, the handling of the 1D line is quite a bit different than the 20D. If you haven't had time to properly learn and experiment with the camera before the wedding shoot, you'll likely get worse photos rather than better. I've had my 1D/n for almost a month and over ten thousand frames, and I've barely scratched the surface.

Doc.

If you want the best in speed, the 1DMKIIn is good way to go. If you want more resolution, consider the 5D.

You say money isn't an issue, but you need to factor in quality lens along with a second body and the other things like flash, cards, batteries, etc. That's why the cost issue might be more important.

Can someone explain focal length conversion factor-lenses for me. I'd like to understand that concept and why it makes a diff in a camera. The Mark II advertised that it did not have it and that it is a full frame camera.

Thanks for all of the good comments. I am a novice photographer and such a novice that I don't think even novice does me justice. All the same, the girls (there are two weddings) are paying me so much that I could buy 8 Mark II's and still make a profit. But it's not all pics I'm shooting. I'm doing video with HD Sony equipment (which I must make into an hour long DVD and the videography is where I excel), and my wife is doing their scrapbooks and we're covering two weddings, two family dinners and two rehearsal dinners. With all of that, I wanted to make sure that if I failed, it wouldn't be due to lack of good equipment.

I do not have a backup camera and did not think of that until someone posted that I should. If I shoot with the 20D, I could buy another for backup and be comfortable with how to use it. Or, I could buy the Mark II and have two bodies as well, but I only have a month to learn the Mark II.

At this point, I'm not even remotely swayed to go to the Mark II for all of the reasons posted here, but I'd still like to understand focal length conversion factor-lenses before I make my final decision.

Thanks to everyone for the replies. I have found them most helpful.

Cliff

PS: I have an EFS 18-55 lens and a 75-300 lens.

I just can't see the reason 20D vs MarkIIDs...

money not an issue.. I would get
2 - Canon 5d,
16-35 2.8,
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8 IS,
2 -580ex

and this set will cover prety much anything, the rest is up to photographer

I really hope this is a serious thread...

If so, please send us a pic of all the new equipment you get when you get it. I'd like to see someone who does not know about the crop factor/sensor size drop so much money into one job.

I can speak with some authority about learing the 1Ds Mark II, having just bought one and am converting from film to digital. There's a lot there. The learning curve is steep for me. It's not the photography side as much as the technical side. This camera can do a lot, and you need to understand it so you don't set something wrong. Not that you can't start out getting great shots right out of the chute, because I am. However, I sure wouldn't try and shoot a wedding with mine right now. I'm not there yet. I'm limiting my professional work with it to Real Estate (interior and exterior) at this point. In the mean time, I'm having the time of my life shooting it. I've only had it a few days, but it goes WAY beyond the limitations I had with film.

enough for 8 1DsMkII for a novice wedding photographer? This has to be a troll.

If you really have that much money, I'd recommend a 5D. It has the flexibility of full frame (don't have to stand back), a higher resolution and lots of extra stuff

If you don't know why you should get a 1DsMkII, then don't get it. Simple.

Leo

Maybe...just maybe, this is a serious question from someone that has more money than they know what to do with. In the spirit of this being a serious post here my take on it.

Quite honestly, and it was said earlier, if you are asking these questions you really aren't ready for the 1DsMKII. I would agree with Dante (did I say that) that the tools will make you better to a certain degree. You could give me a set of 7000.00 golf clubs and I'd still be a lousy golfer. I may shave a few strokes off my game but at the end of the day it lies in the talent.

This is seriously flawed logic. More options can certainly equate to better images to a certain degree and it can also lead to more confusion (especially to someone who admittedly doesn't know that much about DSLR) which can lead to a disasterous final product. Owning the top of the line Canon DSLR is not going to guarantee you a happy bride and groom when you give them your shots. If you are pixel counting why not get a medium format camera with a Phase One back.

Have you spent any time in the wedding forum here. There are alot of very good photographers turning out excellent work with anything from the 10D upwards.

I have printed images from a 8.n sensor up to 24X30 and the quality was very very good. Pixel counting is not the best decision making process. I would guess that if you are going to use this camera for just weddings that you will not be able to exploit its full potential. You've said that it was going to be an outside wedding, what about flash, do you have the understanding of how to make this work for you in an outdoor environment.

Your post makes me almost believe that I have bitten on a baited post but so be it. You haven't given us much information to give you really good direction. What lenses do you currently have, what else do you shoot, what is your experience level (beyond what you have already told us), do you have a website for us to look at. So many questions.....

Good luck.