5D VS 1DMKII Preferences

Well, I've never used the DS but I love the 5D compared to the ex-MKIIN...it's a personal preference but since I'm happy, my budget's happy!

Permagrin wrote in post #2218432
Well, I've never used the DS but I love the 5D compared to the ex-MKIIN...it's a personal preference but since I'm happy, my budget's happy!

and thats a great point, happiness is in the eye of the beholder. i think its funny when people try and force their preferences down our throats as if its the gospel of camera gear

Tom W wrote in post #2217462
...In the long run, full frame, better noise characteristics, low-light focusing, and camera size/weight beat out frames per second and the expanded feature set of the 1-series for me.

As for results out-of-the-camera, yes, the 5D does produce a useable product more often. But that's probably a result of the picture styles more than anything. Many don't like them, but the capabilities of the picture styles seems to allow me to mimic types of film that I've used in the past (even though Canon doesn't name them after film types or brands). On the 5D, Canon seems to have honed the in-camera sharpening to a point where the results are crisp without appearing as over-sharpened.

I think we're just the opposite. I value the built-like-a-tank quality of the 1Dxx series (I often test the weathersealing). I agree on the weight - it's not for everyone and a 1D2N with a decent lens on it makes for a hefty combo for sure.

But I have to take exception to the "better noise characteristics" and "low-light focusing." The 5D and 1D2N are both very capable of clean images up to ISO 3200 and I dare say there's minimal difference between the two. As for low-light, I can focus on things in the pitch black of night. How much better does one need?

I shoot RAW, so Picture Styles is of little use to me - but if you use them, the 1D2N can produce the same type of shots the 5D can...

Either way, they're both great cameras. I'll have to pick up a 5D or 1Ds one day.

Double Negative wrote in post #2219372
I think we're just the opposite. I value the built-like-a-tank quality of the 1Dxx series (I often test the weathersealing). I agree on the weight - it's not for everyone and a 1D2N with a decent lens on it makes for a hefty combo for sure.

I can't argue that I didn't like the 1D2's build - it's a proverbial tank. And a well-built one at that. Weight-wise, it wasn't a problem in most situations (which is why I use the battery grip frequently), but when I want to travel light, the 1-series body is just that much extra to carry. I briefly tried an XT as a second body and found that it didn't work for me. Good camera, but too small and the control layout was very awkward when one is used to the dials.

I've compared them side-by-side - the 5D will AF more consistently in very dim situations, just as it's AF specs indicate (-0.5 EV for the 5D vs. 0 EV for the 1D II). And the 5D's high-ISO images are cleaner. Not on a per-pixel basis where the two are very close, but on the basis that the 5D's greater pixel count will render the noise to a finer grain and will preserve more detail as a result. The 11X14 high-ISO image from the 5D, when framed equally and from the same shooting position, is cleaner and more detailed than that of the 1D2.

Marginal differences? Perhaps to some or even most users, but when ones' shooting situations demand low-light performance, they rise in significance.

Perhaps the "N" does produce similar "out-of-camera" output to the 5D (or perhaps not - I never compared), but the non-N didn't. The 1D2 requires more processing than the 5D to produce the same image.

I also shoot RAW, but the picture styles do offer a very solid starting point for an image. Most times, I need but a minor change before converting to JPEG, and often, I don't change a thing. It's already there. Of course, if you don't use DPP to convert, picture styles are rather meaningless.

I'm not trying to take away from the 1D2 or even the newer "N" version, but I am saying that there reasons that one might choose the 5D over the larger 1-series. They're all great cameras, and each can be used in a multitude of situations. But each has its strengths and weakenesses. I am fortunate enough to have been able to use both for a period of time to compare and in the end, I found that the strengths of the 5D better met my needs than those of the 1D2.

Tom W wrote in post #2219536
I've compared them side-by-side - the 5D will AF more consistently in very dim situations, just as it's AF specs indicate (-0.5 EV for the 5D vs. 0 EV for the 1D II). And the 5D's high-ISO images are cleaner. Not on a per-pixel basis where the two are very close, but on the basis that the 5D's greater pixel count will render the noise to a finer grain and will preserve more detail as a result. The 11X14 high-ISO image from the 5D, when framed equally and from the same shooting position, is cleaner and more detailed than that of the 1D2.

Tom, this is the best that I've ever heard that explained...

Tom W wrote in post #2219536
I can't argue that I didn't like the 1D2's build - it's a proverbial tank. And a well-built one at that. Weight-wise, it wasn't a problem in most situations (which is why I use the battery grip frequently), but when I want to travel light, the 1-series body is just that much extra to carry. I briefly tried an XT as a second body and found that it didn't work for me. Good camera, but too small and the control layout was very awkward when one is used to the dials.

Agreed. That's why I'm keeping the D30 around. Not only for its completely creamy, noise free images - but also when weight or being discreet is an issue. I really prefer grips, but the D30 stripped of the BG-ED makes for a small package, especially with the EF 35mm f/2.0 mounted.

Usually if I'm shooting in conditions that dark, I'll attached the 580EX and use the focus assist beam. I've literally focused and shot in complete darkness. But I can agree with what you said. The pixel count definitely helps with the noise, something I hadn't thought of earlier. But to be fair, the 1D2N does very well with noise also.

The 1D2N has the Digic II and enhanced NR like the 5D - but unlike the 1D2.

I can believe that, certainly. The "N" added some decent upgrades over the 1D2.

Absolutely. Picture Styles in both the 5D and 1D2N definitely help the JPEG shooters.

I agree that both cameras are excellent, and definitely have their pros and cons that appeal to different shooters and situations. I had to stick up for the 1D2N, though.

Double Negative wrote in post #2220342
I had to stick up for the 1D2N, though.

And I, the 5D.

Isn't it amazing that we have these fine tools?

Slightly off topic: There's a thread on Fred Miranda's forum right now where a guy disassembled his saltwater-ruined 20D. He has several dozon images on PBase showing the various stages of disassembly. There's an incredible amount of circuitry stuffed in these little boxes. Here's the link:

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/47031​6

My point - well, if I have one, it's that these cameras are all sophisticated machines.

I've tried both cameras. Both will do the job, now its just which does your gear whore side of your brain scream for more. I would try to get some use out of your 1 series before you sell it, not only that it will retain retail value better when the new stuff comes out so you can upgrade then :P

Dante King wrote in post #2209266
3fps is SLOW.

..coming from the man who had a whopping 4 before that.

Dante King wrote in post #2209274
Anyone want to trade a 1dsmk2 for a 5D plus $$$ just PM me.

Someone on FM has been begging for this.

I had the 1DMkII for a while, Dan. I didn't like the noise, the layout, the time it took to change things, the weight, etc. The 5D is a simple one-button push to do just about anything. I don't find the AF to be any more inaccurate than the 1DMkII. Seems pretty equal to me. All of my L's snap to focus on the 5D in any light. The 17-40 has some difficulty sometimes, but DUH.

I don't regret it a bit. I like it. I'm working on getting a 1DMkIIN, because it's so close to the 5D. I'm going to have both for a while, and see which one strikes my fancy more. I love some things about the N/MkII, but some I just hate and the 5D trumps it. They have their strong points. If it were up to me, I'd have both.

Tom W wrote in post #2220807
And I, the 5D.

Isn't it amazing that we have these fine tools?

Fair enough!

And... I wouldn't want it any other way.

I've also been looking at the differences between a 1D and 5D.... And I'm leaning more toward 5D now. I shoot a lot of theatre and Dance, and high IQ and high ISO performance is a major thing for me.

On the other side of things, I also shoot a lot of mountain biking. I know the 5D is not the "IDEAL" camera for sports, but I don't see why, with a fast shutter speed, it wouldn't work. With its FF, and high IQ and super resolution, how could it be bad?

3fps just isn't enough for fast moving things, a lot of the time. That's all. As long as you have nice lenses, though, the AF is more than adequate for just about anything.

I think there will be a replacement for the 5D shortly, they are really slashing the price of this camera. Maybe something with 5 fps would be really nice on the 5D.
Ron at first the weight of the 1 series can be a pain but after a while you get used to it. If you get the "N" give it a chance, I think you will enjoy it

Dan

For most ppl, a 1 series really isn't needed. The 5D is a good camera too. Both are good cameras.

Dan, you can easily do your daughter's soccer with the 5D. You'll lose some reach, but that's about all.