The REAL dilemma - Kidak DCS Pro/c V EOS1D Mark 2

Help!!!

Given that these camera bodies are the same price, should I stay loyal to Canon or go with the Kodak Pro ??

I don't know what to do - have the 1D on order but getting twitchy!!

Please help me......!!

(I HAVE RE-READ THE PREVIOUS THREADS>>>> BUT AM STILL UNSURE!)

Do you need incredibly good AF, high framerate and a generally very responsive camera or do you need megapixels?

I would choose the Canon, but then again I have handled the Canon and the Kodak and I know which 'felt' better.

If you want to do portraits, then the Kodak or a 1Ds. For everything else, the 1D MK-II is the better choice. The Kodak, just like the 1Ds, is a studio camera and should not be confused with the MK-II which was built for 'action' and outdoor photography (and PJ's of course).

The easy way is to think of the Kodak as a Drebel version of the 1Ds. Costs less yes, but just not as good.

The 1DM2 is a completely different beasty.

As mentioned the Kodak is a studio camera, it likes lots of light, which you can get in a studio. With lots of light, it will apparrently take really great pictures (which is why I keep looking at it for my next camera). However, outside of the studio, other then pixels I feel my 10D is better in the utility department. Shoots faster anyway and works in lower light, with less noise.
The Kodak will work out doors, but you will have a lot more work to do in the post processing phase.

The 1DM2 on the other hand is a sports camera, if you need to take action shots and in settings where the light is not so good, all my research says the 1DM2 is the one for you.

For me, The 1DM2 does not meet my needs, but most of the time I am shooting in a studio. The other critical part is the Kodak is a full-frame camera, good for artistic wide angle shots, while the 1DM2 stil has a FOV crop factor of 1.3x against it.

Finally, If you can afford the 1Ds go for that instead if you don't need the frame rate of the 1DM2. The only reason to get the 1DM2 if you can afford the 1Ds.

Just my semi-informed opinion.

For trivia; I tried to weasel a cheap Kodak SLRc out of my Kodak buds on their Government side (soon to be ITT maybe), but the ones I knew can't get one using their discount (they only get the discount on P&S cameras). Darn.

As a guy that has both 1Ds and 1D MkII, I can say that the 1DS will be staying in the backup role unless I need the megapixel advantage. So basically it will be in the studio role most of the time.

Scott

Lovin the MkII's.......

If you are still unsure.. then it is clear that you have NEVER USED A 1D!!!!

Trust me.. once you use a 1D.. you will not pay much attention to the Kodaks of the world... 8)

Thanks all.

The biggest and most annoying problem for me is the fact that I can't find anywhere in the UK where I can sit in a shop and use both bodies as a test.

The 1D mk II is on order and will be here soonish and put me out of my misery.......

(I have owned a Canon camera continously since I was 9 yrs old.....Once a Canon fan - ALWAYS a Canon fan!)